Full text of "Petri privilegium : three pastoral letters to the clergy of the diocese"

See other formats

PETEI PRIVILEGIFM.

LONDON : PRINTKD BT

•POTTHWOODK AND CO., JJBW-8TBHKT BQUARB
AND PABLIAMK3T 8TOEBT

PBTEI PBIVILEGIUM :

THREE PASTORAL LETTERS TO THE
CLERGY OF THE DIOCESE

BY
HENRY EDWARD

AECHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTEE

Tlaffi rrjs rov fJMicapiov Tl4rpov (pwvris ep/j.T]vevs KaOiffrdfJifVOS.

BPIST. CONCIL. CHALCBD. AD S. LEON. MAGX.
Condi. Labbe, torn. iv. p. 1235.

LONDON :

LONGMANS, GKEEN, AND CO.
1871.

'Soliditas enim illius fidei, quse in Apostolorum principe est
laudata, perpetua est: et sicut permanet quod in Christo Petrus
credidit, ita permanet quod in Petro Christus instituit.

S. LEO MAGN. SERM. ill. 2,

Ed. Ballerim* Venet. 1753.

Magnum et mirabile, dilectissimi, huic viro consortium potentise
suss tribuit divina dignatio : et si quid cum eo commune caeteris
voluit esse principibus, nunquam nisi per ipsum dedit quicquid aliis

non negavit.

. Ibid. iv. 2.

Soliditas enim ilia, quam de Petra Christo etiam ipse Petra

factus accepit, in suos quoque se transfudit hseredes.'

Ibid. iv. 4.

PREFACE.

THE three PASTORAL LETTERS, now collected
in one volume, were written at separate times,
and contain three distinct parts of the same
subject ; that is to say, the Infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff.

The first, which treats of the eighteenth
Centenary of St. Peter's martyrdom, simply
affirms the doctrine of Infallibility as it has
been enunciated and taught by the Theological
tradition of the Church.

The second traces the line of the historical
tradition by which the same Catholic doctrine
has been affirmed.

The third states and explains the doctrine of
the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff as it has
been defined by the (Ecumenical Council of
the Vatican.

Vlll PREFACE.

Taken as a whole the three Pastorals present
at least an outline of this revealed truth, now
happily for ever placed beyond controversy or
doubt by the divine authority of the Church.

They record, also, the indiction, the prelude,
and the first four sessions of the first Council of
the Vatican, the nineteenth GEcumenical Synod
of the Catholic Church, which will leave its
indelible mark upon the future, as the Council
of Trent has left its impression upon the past
and present, of the Christian world.

CHRISTMAS 1870.

CONTENTS.

Moral significance of the Centenary, 4 ; Five Special Acts, 5 ;
Words of the Sovereign Pontiff on June 17, 1867, 6 ; Assembling
of the Bishops, 9; The Centenary and the Council of Trent, 12;
Visitation of the Limina Apostolorum, 15 ; Petrus in suis successoribus
vivit et praesidet et judicium exercet (Concil. Ephes. sess. Hi.), 16.

Privilegia Petri, four propositions from Scripture, universal
tradition, the Fathers, and Councils, 17 ; Three classes of evidence
for the infallibility of the Church, 21 ; Infallibility active and
passive, 23 ; Cathedra Petri, 24 ; The supreme office of teaching
and ruling, 27.

Allocution of the Sovereign Pontiff, June 26, 1867, 28 ; Answer
of the Bishops, 30 ; Their recognition of the Supreme and Plenary
office of the successor of St. Peter, 34 ; Allegations of Protestant
critics, 35 ; the Encyclical of 1864, 37.

Nationalism and Gallicanism, 41 ; Condemned by Innocent XL
in 1682, and Alexander VIII. in 1691, 47 ; the Church in France
of to-day, 53 ; The ordinary medium of Divine Faith, 57 ; Decrees
ex Cathedra, 59.

1 The order of truth is abiding,' St. Leo., 67 ; Reasons for con-
voking the General Council, 69 ; The Supreme Pontiff and General
Councils, 71 ; The evidence of the first six General Councils, 73.

The Council of Trent, 75 ; Popular misunderstandings, 77 ; Two
elements of the discipline of the Church, 81 ; The order of nature
and the order of grace, 83.

The Christian society of the world menaced, 85 ; The wounds of
the past, 87 ; The Protestant Reformation, 89 ; Spiritus Domini
replevit orbem terrarum, 91 ; The Pope in presence of a hostile
world, 103.

IV CONTENTS.

Public Documents of the Centenary.

1. Allocution of His Holiness, June 26, 1867, 109.

2. Homily of His Holiness, June 29, 1867, 116.

3. Salutation or address of the Bishops, July 1, 120.

4. Reply of His Holiness, 139.

THE

CENTENARY OF SAINT PETER

AND

THE GENERAL COUNCIL:

A PASTORAL LETTEE TO THE CLEKGY

&c.

HENRY EDWARD

AKCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER.

LONDON :

LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO.
1867.

LONDON : FEINTED BY

8POTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARB
AND PARLIAMENT STREET

KEVEREND AND DEAR BRETHREN, —

I should not rightly fulfil the office which binds
me to you, and to the flock committed to my charge,
if I were not to endeavour to make you share, so
far as I am able, in the great events which have
marked the Eighteenth Centenary of S. Peter's Mar-
tyrdom. I need hardly tell you that, next after the
feeling of joy which filled my mind, as I looked
upon the assembly of more than half the bishops
of the world gathered around the throne of the Yicar
of our Lord, there was nothing more present to me
than the wish that you could have been eye-witnesses,
with me, of these great acts of the Church; or, at
least, that I might be able to convey to you some-
what of the consolation, confidence, and light which I
trust they bestowed on me. This I will endeavour
now to do. But at the outset I must disclaim both
the intention and the power to set before you any
adequate picture of the beauty, majesty, and splen-
dour of those solemnities. I can only say that all was
proportionate to the greatest kingdom upon earth, the
Holy Catholic Church. Of all that spoke to the eye,
therefore, I shall be silent. I could not describe it if

I would ; and I leave it to others who have the gifts of
observation, and memory, and delineation required for
the task. Some have already written of these great
solemnities; others will do so hereafter. I shall con-
fine myself entirely to that which did not meet the
eye. I mean the moral significance, and, I may say,
the moral beauty, majesty, and splendour of the late
events in Rome.

The first thought which arose in my mind was
the contrast of the spectacle displayed on the
Janiculum eighteen hundred years ago, and the
solemnity then before me in S. Peter's. On the day
of the martyrdom of the Apostle, the people of Rome
hurried with rude and cruel curiosity across the
Tiber. A multitude of faces, distorted by hate and
passion, surrounded the cross of Peter. There, tra-
dition says,, he hung head downwards in shame and
agony. The other day, pastors and faithful from
all the world came up to his tomb on the same
Janiculum, and surrounded in loving veneration the
throne of his successor. In this victory of the Cross,
and in the perpetuity of the victory, there is the hand
of God revealed. No human power could so change
the will in man.

Although I feel it impossible to describe the events
of those days, nevertheless there are five acts so
marked in their character that I may at least enume-
rate them :

First, was the Procession on the Festival of Corpus
Christi, in which the Sacrament of our Lord's Pre-

sence was borne in the hands of His Vicar, attended
by half the episcopate of the Catholic Church :

Secondly, the Consistory, in which the Sovereign
Pontiff announced his intention to convene an (Ecu-
menical Council:

Thirdly, the eighteenth Centenary of S. Peter's Mar-
tyrdom, held over the tomb of the Apostle. The
splendour and beauty of that solemnity was probably
never equalled. It was royal and pontifical in all the
fulness of majestic grandeur.

Fourthly, was the Feast of S. Paul in his Basilica out
of the walls, where the relics of the Apostle of the
Gentiles are enshrined. This Basilica, which for grace
and beauty surpasses S. Peter's as much as it is sur-
passed by S. Peter's for majesty and grandeur, was
once under the protection of the kings of England.
Since the unhappy schism of our country, no pro-
tector has been named. S. Paul's still awaits a
happier time.

Lastly, on the following day, the Holy Father gave
audience to the bishops, to receive from them the
Address or Eesponse, in which they united them-
selves in heart and mind to their supreme Head. The
gravity and moral grandeur of that act we shall endea-
vour to estimate hereafter. When the address had
been read, and when the Holy Father was about to
bestow the Apostolical benediction and bid farewell
to the bishops, the Angelus of noon sounded. He
rose, and began the Angelical Salutation, half the
bishops of the world responding. Such a Salutation

was, perhaps, never before offered to the Mother of
God on earth. At Ephesus there were four hundred
and thirty bishops, but the Vicar of her Divine Son
was not there. So, simply and grandly, ended the
Centenary of 1867.

There was, however, one other event over which
I cannot pass in silence. The 17th of June was
the anniversary of the Pope's creation. After the
Mass in the Sistine, the Holy Father went to unvest
in the Pauline Chapel. The Cardinal Vicar, in the
name of the Sacred College, made the usual address
of congratulation, ending with the words that they
wished the Holy Father ' health and many years to
see the peace and triumph of the Church.7 His
Holiness immediately answered, in words which,
unfortunately, were not taken down ; but as nearly
as possible they were as follows : — 4 1 accept
your good wishes from my heart, but I remit their
verification to the hands of God. We are in a moment
of great crisis. If we look only to the aspect of
human events, there is no hope ; but we have a
higher confidence. Men are intoxicated with dreams
of unity and progress ; but neither is possible
without justice. Unity and progress based on pride
and egotism are illusions. God has laid on me
the duty to declare the truths on which Christian
Society is based, and to condemn the errors which
undermine its foundations. And I have not been
silent. In the Encyclical of 1864, and in that which
is called the Syllabus, I declared to the world the

dangers which threaten Society, and I condemned the
falsehoods which assail its life. That act I now con-
firm in your presence, and I set it again before you
as the rule of your teaching. To you, Venerable
Brethren, as Bishops of the Church, I now appeal to
assist me in this conflict with error. On you I rely
for support. When the people of Israel wandered in
the wilderness, they had a pillar of fire to guide them
in the night, and a cloud to shield them from the
heat by day. You are the pillar and the cloud to
the people of God. By your teaching you must
guide the faithful in the darkness ; by your example
you must shield them from the burning sun of this
world. I am aged and alone, praying on the moun-
tain ; and you, the Bishops of the Church, are come to
hold up my arms. The Church must suffer, but it will
conquer. " Preach the word ; be instant in season, out
of season; reprove, entreat, rebuke with all patience
and doctrine. For there shall be a time " — and that
time is come — " when they will not endure sound doc-
trine." The world will contradict you, and turn
from you ; but be firm and faithful. " For I am even
now ready to be sacrificed, and the time of my dis-
solution is at hand." " I have," I trust, " fought a good
fight," and "have kept the faith :" and there is laid up
for you, and I hope for me also, " a crown of justice,
which the Lord, the just Judge, will render to me at
that day." The power and emotion with which
these words were spoken moved every one who heard
them.

There is, perhaps, hardly any Pontiff who has
governed the Church with more frequent exercises of
supreme authority than Pius the Ninth. The creation
of Hierarchies, the definition of the Immaculate Con-
ception, the declarations on the Temporal Power, the
condemnations in the Encyclical of 1864, manifest, in
a singular degree, the plenitude of his supreme office
as the Kuler and Doctor of the Universal Church.
Nevertheless there is, perhaps, no Pontiff who has
united the whole episcopate so closely to himself, or
has called them so often to his side. In 1854 the
bishops were invited to assist at the declaration of
the dogma, for which the whole Church had so long
waited with desire. Two hundred and fifty as-
sembled about his throne in witness of the faith of
the Universal Church in the Immaculate Conception
of our Blessed Mother ; and bore home to their flocks
the pious belief of their hearts as an article of faith
defined by the Yicar of her Divine Son.

Again, in 1862, when the conflict of the temporal
power was at itshighest, Pius the Ninth proclaimed
the canonisation of the martyrs of Japan, and invited
the bishops once more to Rome. About two hundred
bishops obeyed his bidding, and, in words never to be
forgotten, united themselves to him in the conflict he
had so long sustained for the rights and liberties of
the Holy See ; which are the rights and liberties of
the Universal Church.

And now a third time he has summoned the
bishops of the whole world. You will all remember

when the intention was first made known. It was
when the two years of the Convention were expiring ;
when all human help was departing from him, and
men thought the time was come for the downfal of
the temporal power. The French armies were
to be withdrawn in December 1866. Then it was
that the Holy Father invited the bishops of the
world to surround him in Rome in June 1867. Men
of the world counted it to be madness. While they
were prophesying revolution, anarchy, and I know
not what, the Holy Father, with calm confidence in
God, began to make preparations for celebrating the
Centenary of S. Peter's Martyrdom over the tomb
of the Apostle. The event has justified his confi-
dence, and taught a lesson both to the world and to
ourselves : to us, that we be more courageous, and to
the world, that it be less pretentious in its prophecies.
It has manifested, with an evidence which no one has
dared to deny, the life and the power of the Catholic
Church. We had been listening to daily discourses
on the decline and fall of the Church as a power
among the nations. At the moment when men were
exchanging gifts and congratulations, as they be-
lieved, over its dead body, the Head of the Church
spoke, and the bishops, literally from the four winds
of heaven, assembled round him. It was not a com-
mand, it was not even an injunction ; it was a simple
invitation, an expression of his wish. Five hundred
bishops, with a multitude of the priesthood and
faithful of the Church, came up from north, south,

east, and west, over land and sea, to the Suc-
cessor of S. Peter, There were bishops from China,
and the far east of Asia ; from California, and
the far west of America ; from the far north of
Tartary, and of Canada; from Australia and the
islands of the Southern seas. There were present
the chief pastors of at least thirty races and na-.
tions. No voice but one in all the world could
have called together such an assembly — the voice
of the successor of Peter, to whom the whole world
was committed, of the Vicar of Him to whom 'all
power in heaven and on earth is given.'

It is not, then, in the majesty and splendour which
meets the eye that the magnitude and grandeur of
this event is to be measured. Taken only as a demon-
stration of moral power, and of the superiority of
the moral over the material order of the world, the
assembly in Eome at this moment, in the face of all
menace of wars and of revolutions, has surely a signi-
ficance far wider and deeper than any event in our
times. More than this : no event, since the last General
Council was closed, has manifested so luminously to
the intellect, and, I may say, so palpably to the
sense, the unity, universality, unanimity, and autho-
rity of the only true Church on earth. I am not
only bound, but glad, to acknowledge the truthfulness,
justice, and candour of those who, though not of the
Catholic Church, have written from Eome the de-
scription of what they saw. With one or two
exceptions, not worthy of notice, their narratives

have been honourable, manly, and straightforward.
Certainly the late events in Rome ought to awaken
in any Christian heart a noble and a generous sym-
pathy. They were an exhibition of the Christian
Faith and Church in acts of Divine worship, and of
charity to all mankind, divested of every accent of
controversy. Whosoever believes in Christianity
and desires the spread of the kingdom of our Divine
Lord upon earth, must have a sympathy in the great
assembly of the Church the other day. Even those
who are separated from the Catholic and Roman
Church recognise it as the great foundation of
Christendom. They who reject parts of its doctrine
hold the Creed of the Apostles, which it has guarded
from the beginning ; they who rest their faith upon
Councils, Fathers, and Scriptures, know that the cus-
tody of all these is ultimately in the Catholic Church.
They who repose their Christianity upon the testi-
mony and facts of history, know that the last and
highest witness for the Christian revelation, in its
succession and even in its origin, is the Catholic and
Roman Church. It is impossible, therefore, that
they can look without sympathy upon this majestic
demonstration of its indefectible life and immutable
identity.

It may without exaggeration be said, not only
that, since the Council of Trent, no such manifestation
of the unity and universality of the Church has
been seen, but that the eighteen years of interrupted
and lingering toil of that Council in a valley of the

Tyrol never exhibited at any time such a demon-
stration of the world- wide organisation and central
authority of the Church as these last three weeks in
Rome. Trent is not the tomb of the Apostle.
Legates presided there : here was the Vicar of our
Lord in person. At the Council of Trent, hardly a
hundred bishops were present : on the Centenary
of S. Peter's Martyrdom, five hundred bishops of the
Church surrounded the throne of his successor.
But it may be said that the Centenary was but a
pageant : the Council of Trent is a power, which for
three hundred years has governed the Church. This
is most true : nor can three days be compared with
three hundred years; nor a Canonisation and a few
Allocutions be weighed against eighteen years of
supreme authority in defining the faith and legislating
for the Church. Let us compare, therefore, this
great Pontifical act only with the visible manifesta-
tions of Trent ; and it will be within the bounds of
moderation to say that neither the opening nor
the closing of that Council so drew to itself the
eyes of the whole world, nor so reflected the unity
and universality of the Church, as this Centenary.

But if it would be unreasonable to compare
these few days of festival in Eome with eighteen
years of legislation in Trent, it would be equally
unreasonable, and most superficial, to estimate the
moral significance of this Centenary by the cere-
monies and solemnities of those three weeks. This
event may be taken, I believe, to be the opening of

a new period, and to contain a future which may
reach over centuries : and it is to this I would call
your thoughts.

And first, this solemn celebration of the anni-
versary of S. Peter's Martyrdom has in it a con-
fession of faith, which must exercise a powerful action
both upon the Church and the world.

The words of our Divine Master, ' Thou art Peter,
and upon this rock I will build my Church,' never
yet received a more majestic interpretation. They
are blazoned round the dome which hangs above his
sanctuary. But the other day, the reality which they
prophesy was there. The bishops of the Universal
Church assembled round his tomb. There they were,
resting upon him as the rock and foundation of their
power throughout the world. Fathers, doctors, and
Councils have, in all ages, saluted Rome as the Chair
of Peter; but here, in honour of his martyrdom
and of his successor, five hundred bishops came from
the farthest regions of the earth to declare their faith
in the Divine centre of the Catholic unity, and their
vital adherence to it. The words of antiquity seemed
to be impersonated. S. Cyprian's axiom of unity
was there visible ; ' There is one God, and one Christ,
and one Church, and one Chair founded upon the
Rock (super Petram) by the voice of the Lord.' * 4 To
manifest unity, He has ordained by His authority
that unity should take its rise from one [ Apostle]. 'f

* S. Cypr. Epist. xl. ad Plebem, &c. Ed. Baluz.
f De Unit. Eccl. Opp. p. 195.

The words of S. Augustin * were there before us :
Peter 'personated [the Church] because of the pri-
macy he held among the Disciples;' and of S.
Optatus,f that ' Peter alone received the keys;' and
of S. Leo, that our Lord has willed that whatsoever
He gave to the Apostles they should possess alone
through Peter ;J and of S. Ambrose, 'where Peter
is, there is the Church. '§ In the midst of this
nineteenth century, when faith is waxing faint
even in nations once Catholic, and men have been
deriding, and foretelling the dowhfal of the suc-
cessor of S. Peter, as a relic of mediaeval super-
stition, and the shadow of an old usurpation, the
bishops of the world come together, to reaffirm their
faith in the supremacy and prerogatives of the Prince
of the Apostles, in the person of his successor ; and
their absolute adherence and submission to his Chair
and to his authority.

In this assembly of bishops in Rome there was also
contained the recognition and fulfilment of some of
the highest obligations of the episcopate. By a law
of great antiquity, resulting from the primacy of
jurisdiction and the plenitude of pastoral care which
was committed to S. Peter, and in him to his suc-
cessors, the bishops, as pastors of the flock, are
bound to appear personally, at fixed intervals of time,

* Enarr. in Ps. 108, torn. v. p. 1215.

f S. Optat. De Schismate Donat. Lib. 1. Opp. p. 10.

j S. Leon. Serm. in Die Assumpt. suae. iii. Opp. p. 52.

§ S. Ambr. in Ps. xl. torn. i. p. 879, ed. Ben.

before the tomb of the Apostle. By the Constitutions
of Benedict XIV., it is ordered that all patriarchs,
primates, archbishops, and bishops shall visit the
Limina Apostolorum: those of Italy and the neigh-
bouring shores every three years ; of Germany, Spain,
England, and the north of Europe every four years ; of
the remoter parts of Europe every five years ; of Asia
and the more distant countries every ten years. The
duty of this visit consists of three parts : first, per-
sonal presence at the tomb of the Apostle; second,
the act of reverence and obedience to the Roman
Pontiff; and thirdly, the account which every bishop
is bound to render in writing to the Pastor of
pastors, of the state of his diocese, both of his clergy
and flock, descending into the minutest details of their
number and condition. This visit is a recognition of
the supreme jurisdiction of the Vicar of our Lord over
the Universal Church. It is a direct account, ren-
dered by each bishop to the Pastor who represents
the chief of the Apostles. If the Sovereign Pontiff
were at Gaeta or at Avignon, the visit would be made
there, or wheresover he may be. Under the splen-
dour and beauty of this Centenary, therefore, there
was this world-wide recognition of the supreme
pastoral care of the chief Pastor upon earth; and
an account, minute and universal, of the state of
the whole Catholic Church, as of one fold under one
shepherd.

It is certainly not without a Divine disposal that,
high and above all other events at this moment,

should be manifested the universality of the Church
resting upon Peter. In an age when men are wan-
dering, or feeling their way uncertainly, believing
that a Church exists, but not knowing where to find
it, the two notes which S. Augustin held up before
the Donatists, the diffusa per orbem, and the Cathedra
Petri, are visibly seen, not as texts in a page, but as
living facts before our eyes. I hope that it will be
not unacceptable to you if I draw together old truths
with which, Reverend and dear Brethren, I know you
to be familiar : nevertheless, this moment gives them
a special seasonableness, and a new explicitness and
application to our times.

What I conceive is brought vividly before us is the
perpetual office and action of Peter as the source
of unity and infallibility to the Church; and at the
same time the eminently practical and pervading in-
fluence of this Divine order. With those who are
out of the Church, Peter is a historical name, a person
in the past, a subject of patristic learning, a symbol of
unity and authority. To Catholics, Peter teaches and
rules at this hour. His prerogatives are wielded by
successors, but the powers are his. He is the source
of jurisdiction, the organ of truth, the centre of unity.
Pontiffs come and go, but Peter abides always. As
one of the greatest of his successors has said : ' Simon
may die, but Peter lives for ever/ The Catholic
theology, therefore, and the Councils of the Church,
when they speak of Peter and of his prerogatives, are
using no rhetorical phrases, no oriental and allegorical

exaggerations. They use the words of strict law, and
of exact rights. They express the first principles of
the Divine unity and authority of the Church of God.
When Bellarmin enumerates the eight-and-twenty
prerogatives of S. Peter, he is defining the exclusive
primacy of power and office which lies at the founda-
tion of the Church, and endures to this day. To pass
over all others, there are five prerogatives exclusively
belonging to him, which descend to his successors.
He was the first of the Apostles, and is so always desig-
nated. He had a special name which, both in prophecy
and by promise, made him the rock of foundation.
He had, first and alone, the plenitude of all power. He
had a special stability of faith, by the singular assist-
ance of the prayer of our Divine Lord ; and an office,
of which that stability is the condition, to confirm his
brethren; and lastly, he had the supreme and sole
charge of the whole flock on earth. In virtue of
these prerogatives Peter became, and, in his successor,
is to this day, the source of mission, the centre and
bond of Churches, the note of unity, the test of
truth, the fountain of jurisdiction.

If there be, then, any truth evidently declared in
Scripture and in universal tradition, in the writings
of Fathers, and in the decrees of Councils, it is that
which may be summed up in the following pro-
positions : —

(1.) That to Peter, first and alone, was given by
our Divine Lord the plenitude of all power, both of

teaching and of ruling, together with the charge of
the whole flock on earth.

(2.) That this power was so given to him that he
was able to act alone and supremely, apart from the
other Apostles; whereas the other Apostles were
unable to act except in subordination to him.

(3.) That to him a special assistance was granted,
to sustain him in the knowledge and declaration of
the faith, and a special office committed to him to
confirm and to sustain the faith of the Apostles ; so
that the deposit of faith was doubly secured, first in
the person of Peter, and next in the college of the
Apostles in union with him.

(4.) That this Divine foundation and institution of
the Church is perpetual; that Peter lives on in his
successors, and the college of the Apostles in the
episcopate ; so that both the Chair of Peter is in-
defectible and infallible, and also the episcopate in
union with it.

Such are, in fact, the principles which were
embodied in this great solemnity; and that I may
more fully and completely express this confession
of faith, I will take the words of another, more
capable than I am to convey its full force.

4 Eome, through its bishop, successor of the Apostle
S. Peter, forms the centre of unity to the whole
Church. Hence those marks and notes, which are
for the purpose of designating the kingdom of God
on earth, must, in virtue of such title, attach to the
Roman Church, as chief among all particular Churches,

the union of which constitutes the Church Universal.
And as it is especially in this characteristic of Rome,
as being the foundation, that the force of cohesion
resides which makes the Church one united and
harmonious whole, in Rome, too, should be found the
conditions of the Church's unity, sanctity, catholicity,
and apostolicity. Take from the Church the primacy
which Peter brought and bequeathed to Rome, and
the Church has ceased to exist ; it has vanished from
men's eyes, has lost its infallible teaching, and can no
longer guide mankind in the way of salvation.

4 It was in a visible way that Jesus Christ designated
the Apostle Peter from the rest ; and in like manner
it is from its visible head, and from its union with
him, that the Church derives that complete fulness
of organisation which constitutes its beauty and its
glory. The Roman Church possesses, immediately
and intrinsically, the attributes which characterise
the kingdom of God;* all others share in them only
by their union with it. For Rome is the One only
Church to which all others must conform, by reason
of its preeminent primacy, and because within it the
Apostolic traditions have been preserved.*)- Rome,
with its arenas dyed with Christian blood, showing
on the line of its Pontiffs twenty- seven confessors in
the purple of martyrdom ; Rome, that for centuries

* Lupoli, Jur. Eccl. prael. vol. I., p. 70, sqq. Th. Stapleton,
Vere admiranda, seu de magnitudine Romanae Ecclesise libri duo.
Ant. 1599, in 4to.

f S. Iren. adv. H^r. III. 3, § 21, note 27.

B 2

was one wide field of slaughter, to which the children
of the Cross came from all quarters of the Roman
world to vindicate their glorious title at the price of
a cruel death.* Eome is the Holy Church, which
Christ has given for a foundation, in the person of
him to whom His own prayer secured indefectibility
of faith for all who believe in Him ; the Church which
has preserved, pure and intact, holiness of teach-
ing ; from which descends the order that presides
over the administration of the holy sacraments ; and
whose holy laws guide mankind to salvation. Rome
is the Universal Church, whose gospel messengers
have traversed the whole world ; whose faith is pro-
claimed throughout the earth ; which has accom-
plished what pagan Rome attempted in vain, and
subdued that world to itself, f However numerous
and brilliant its victories, war never subjugated so
many nations to it as Christian peace has ranged
beneath its laws.J This unparalleled greatness and
glory Rome owes to the Apostles ; to the Prince of
the Apostles, above all : hence it is the Apostolic
Church ; and more, the Princely Apostolic Church.
If in ancient days it could come with a claim to the
homage of mankind, and point with just and holy

* Stapleton, loc. cit. pp. 22, 23. Arringhi, Roma Subterranea,
lib. i. Blaetter, Bd. xi., s. 155, u. ff.

\ Prosper, Lib. de Ingratis : —

Sedes Roma Petri, quas pastoralis honoris
Facta caput mundi, quicquid non possidet armis
Relligione tenet.

J S. Leo, Serm. 82, in Natal. Petri et Pauli, t. T. col. 321.

pride to its twenty-five Pontiffs, how much more
to-day, when it can claim the world's reverence and
admiration with its two hundred and fifty-three
bishops who have sat successively in the Prince of
the Apostles' Chair.*

' Nor is this enough ; the Church of Koine is im-
perishable. Placed in the swiftest stream of events,
amid the vicissitudes of ages and of empires, amid
the raging billows of every passion, exposed to every
fury, constantly assailed by emperors, Gothic kings,
Greek exarchs, Lombards, and Franks — by paganism,
schism, and heresy — there it has ever remained, im-
moveable on that Rock of Peter: that rock, itself
unshaken, of Apostolic and universal unity. What
could Nero do against it, or Domitian, or Decius, or
Dioclesian? What could the gates of hell do against
it, or what can they now ? ' f

The evidence from inspired and uninspired writings
for the infallibility of the Church may be distinguished
into three classes.

First, those which declare the perpetual stability
or infallibility of S. Peter, or of S. Peter and his
successors.

Secondly, those which declare the perpetual sta-
bility or infallibility of the Church with reference to
S. Peter in his successors.

Thirdly, those which declare the perpetual stability

* Bellarmin. de Notis Ecclesice, lib. iv. c. 8.
•f Phillips, Du Droit Eccles. &c., translated by Crouzet. Paris,
1855. Vol. i. pp. 156-159.

or infallibility of the Church, without reference to
S. Peter and his successors.

It would be disproportioned to this letter to quote
at length the proofs of this assertion ; I am compelled
to limit myself to affirming that the extent and the
explicitness of the evidence under the two first
classes is far beyond the extent and the explicitness
of the evidence under the third ; and further, that the
evidence under the first class is at least equal to, if it
be not more than, the evidence under the two last.

The conclusion I would draw from this is, that
whensoever the perpetuity of the faith and the in-
fallibility of the Church is spoken of, the foremost
and governing idea in the mind of the faithful has
always been the Divine order and assistance by which
S. Peter and his successors have been constituted as
the perpetual teachers of the Universal Church, and
guides in the way of eternal life.

The formation of the Church is traced in the order
of the Baptismal Creed. God sent His Son into the
world to be made man. The Incarnate Word, in
Whom were hid all the treasures of wisdom and know-
ledge, became the fountain of grace and truth, of
doctrine, and of jurisdiction, to the world. To the
chief of His Apostles He conveyed by the Holy
Ghost all His communicable prerogatives, and
thereby constituted him His vicar upon earth. Peter
became the head and guide, the fountain of doctrine
and jurisdiction, to the Apostles. The Church sprang
from him, and was formed, as S. Cyprian says, like

the seamless robe of our Lord, from the top through-
out. The texture of the robe spread downwards
from the beam on which it depended. The organisa-
tion of the Church was unfolded from the plenitude
of its head. The prerogatives of stability, perpetuity,
and indefectibility in the head became endowments
of the body united to him. But they existed in Peter
before they were communicated to the Church, and
before the Church was organised to which they were
to be communicated. The indefectibility of truth,
therefore, both in its conception and enunciation,
which includes necessarily the discernment between
truth and falsehood in the custody of the Deposit,
or, in other words, the supernatural gift of infallibili ty,
in the ordinary * state of the Church, resides first in
its head, next in the whole episcopate united with
him; so that the declarations and condemnations of
the head of the Church apart from the episcopate are
infallible ; and likewise those of the episcopate, being
united with him. This constitutes what is called
the active infallibility of the Church. From this,
too, arises the passive infallibility ; that is, the Divine
security which sustains the whole Church in its faith :

* It is impossible to treat in this place of the extraordinary
condition of the Church, such as occurred in what is called ' the
great Western schism.' It is enough for the present to quote the
words of Bellarmin : * Etsi Concilium sine Papa non potest
definire nova dogmata fidei, potest tamen judicare tempore schis-
matis, quis sit verus Papa, et providere Ecclesiae de vero pastore,
quando is nullus aut dubius est : et hoc est, quod recte fecit Con-
cilium Constantiense.' — De Condi. Auct. lib. ii. c. 19, sect. 22.

so that it is impossible for the whole Church to err
in believing, because the pastors of the Church, with
their head, cannot err in teaching. But it is manifest
that, according to this doctrine, the fountain of
infallible teaching is the Divine Head in heaven,
through the organ of the visible head of the Church
on earth.

In a word, then, this Centenary was the Feast of
S. Peter's Chair, elevated to the highest rite and cele-
brated by the whole Church. The one dominant
truth, idea, power, and divine institution which it set
before our eyes and hearts is the Cathedra Petri.
Let us recal to our minds what the studies of earlier
days have made familiar, and our daily labours have
verified.

The Chair of Peter is the power of Peter, and the
place where it has been divinely fixed. The power
of Peter is in the key of knowledge and the key of
jurisdiction, committed by a divine act to him as Vicar
of Christ and head of the Church on earth. The
Divine warrant of this power is recorded in three
declarations of our Divine Master — 4 Tibi dabo claves :'
4 Pasce oves meas :' ' Ego rogavi pro te.' The delivery
of the keys of knowledge and jurisdiction gave the
plenitude of power to teach and to rule ; the delivery
of the flock determined the object of that power ; the
prayer of the Divine Head of the Church sustains the
faith of Peter. I know that the world, and every
heresy and schism that has rebelled against the Vicar
of Christ, has denied, and does daily deny, this affir-

mation of the sense and effect of these three declara-
tory acts of Divine power. But I know that the
Church has always so believed, held, and taught : and
from its tradition nothing can make us swerve. The
foundation thus laid in Peter's person abides to this
day. The faith which was infused into him, not by
' flesh and blood,' but by the ' Father in heaven,' was
sustained by the prayer of the Son of God, and is
transmitted and impersonated in his successors. The
faith of Peter is, by a Divine assistance, perpetual in
the Church ; and is therefore, by its intrinsic stability,
indefectible and infallible. l The Chair of Peter,
then, signifies the place of the power and of the
doctrine of that faith; which is the foundation for
which Christ prayed that it might not fail.' * From
this it follows ' that the Church, or See, or Cathedra,
or Episcopate, or Pontificate of Peter in Kome, which
things are taken for one and the same, to which the
Koman Pontiffs succeed with the full authority and
power of Peter, to bind, to loose, and to teach, derives
its supreme power, as the Council of Florence decreed,
not by concessions of Emperors or of Councils, but
immediately from God.'f

From this special prerogative of the Roman Pontiffs
descends the special prerogative of the Roman Church
— that is, of the particular Church of Rome, with its

* L. Brancatus de Lauraea,, De Virtute Fidei Disp. v. Art. vii.,
de Decretis Eccles. Ed. Rom. 1673. Typis S. C. de Prop. Fid.
This portion of the treatise may be found also in Roccaberti,
Bibl. Max. Pontif. torn. xv. p. 48.

f Ibid., or Roccaberti, ut supra.

clergy and people, of which the Roman Pontiff is
Bishop. All particular Churches, except this, may
err ; the particular Church of Rome cannot ; for
which cause it has inherited a host of titles expressive
of its dignity and stability. It has been known as ' The
Head of the Episcopate/ ' The Mother of all Churches,'
' The Mistress or Teacher and Ruler of all Churches,'
4 The Primacy over all the Church/ ' The Primacy
over all the World/ 4 The Head of Religion/ ' The
Guardian of the Faith/ ' The Guardian of Tradition.7 *
The Roman Church has been regarded as the true
seat of the apostolic tradition ; the doctrine of Rome as
the form of truth ; the Roman See as the pattern for
judgments in faith ; the judgments of Rome as equiva-
lent to decrees of Councils. In a word, the Chair of
Peter has been held to be the test of orthodoxy, the
confirmer of Councils, the supreme tribunal of faith,
the destroyer of heresies, the end of controversies, an
authority which is subject to no appeal, to no reversal,
to no revision, to no superior upon earth.f

What is the sense of all this, but that the indefec-
tibility and infallibility of the Pontiff, by a singular
privilege, pervades the Church of w^hich he is pastor?
Therefore it is that, from the earliest history, we find
the Roman Church exercising this supreme office of

* L. Brancatus de Lauraea, De Decretis Eccles. Art. iii., or
Roccaberti, torn. xv. p. 24.

•f Schrader, De Unitate Romana, pp. 223, 225-6, 273, 279.
Orsi, De irreformabili Rom. Poutif. Judicio, torn. ii. pp. 300, 310,
324.

teaching and ruling. The Eoman Pontiffs, from the
beginning, have issued decrees, sentences, judgments,
condemnations, on faith, on morals, on. universal dis-
cipline, without Councils, general or particular, or with
the assistance of bishops chosen by themselves, or with
their own clergy and theologians. And such acts of
the Roman Church have always been received as
objects of faith, and laws of Divine authority.

I need hardly stay to quote S. Irenasus, who lays
down that all Churches must needs be ' in agreement 7
with the Eoman Church;* or Tertullian, that it had
the singular happiness of receiving the whole doc-
trine of the Apostles, together with their blood ;f
or S. Cyprian, that the faith of the Eomans was com-
mended by S. Paul, and that error in faith could
never find access to them ; J or S. Jerome to Pope
Damasus, ' With you alone is preserved incorrupt the
inheritance of the Fathers ;'§ or S. Augustin, 4 Ee-
scripts have come (from the Apostolic See) : the cause
is finished. '|| I will quote only Theodoret, who sums
up the sense of the Western Church while he bears
witness for the Eastern : ' That most holy See has the
primacy and leadership of the Churches in all the
world by many titles, and by this above all, that it
has continued free from taint of heresy; nor has

* S Iren. : Contra Haer., lib. iv. 38.

| Tertull. De Praescr. c. xxxvi.

J Epist. Iv. Opp. p. 86. Ed. Baluz.

§ Epist. xv. Opp. torn. i. P. I, p. 38. Ed. Ven. 1766.

|| S. Aug. Opp. Serm. cxxxi. s. 10, torn. v. 645.

any one of perverse opinions ever sat in it, but it
has preserved the Apostolic grace inviolate.' * S. Ge-
lasius, therefore, only expressed what the whole
Church believed, when he declared that ' the See of
Peter the Apostle is first, the Roman Church, not
having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing.' f

It must here be observed that the prerogative of
Peter is the cause, the fidelity of the Roman Church
the effect.

These are the principles declared by the Sovereign
Pontiff in his Allocution of June 26, in which he
announced his intention to convoke, at some future
time not yet determined, a General Council. In that
allocution he dwelt upon the strength which the
bishops derive from Rome. He said: 'But if the
general good of the faithful be considered, what,
venerable brethren, can be more timely and whole-
some for Catholic nations, in order to increase their
obedience towards us and the Apostolic See, than that
they should see how highly the sanctity and the
rights of Catholic unity are prized by their pastors,
and should behold them, for that cause, traversing
great distances of sea and land, deterred by no diffi-
culties from hastening to the Roman See, that they
may pay reverence in the person of our humility to
the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ on
earth ? For by this authority of example, far better

* Ad Renat. Presbyt. ep. cxvi. Schrader, De Unitate Romana.
Tom.ii. 217.

f Ibid. torn. ii. p. 217.

than by subtil doctrine, they will perceive what
reverence, obedience, and submission they ought to
bear towards us, to whom, in the person of Peter,
Christ our Lord said, " Feed My lambs — feed My
sheep," and in those words entrusted and committed
to us the supreme care and power over the universal
Church.'

' Moreover, you also, Venerable Brethren, in the
exercise of your sacred ministry, will reap a signal
fruit from this reverence towards the Apostolic See ;
for in the measure in which you are bound by closer
bonds of relationship, faith, and love to the corner-
stone of this mystical building, in that measure, as
the history of the Church in all times teaches, you
will be more and more clothed with that fortitude and
strength which are needed by the amplitude of your
ministry against the attacks of the enemy and the
adversity of events. For what else did Christ our
Lord intend us to understand when he set Peter as
head to defend the stability of his brethren, saying, " I
have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not?" He in-
tended, as S. Leo implies, that "the Lord took a special
care of Peter, and prayed expressly for Peter's faith,
as if the state of the others would be more certain if
the mind of their chief were unconquered. In Peter,
therefore, the fortitude of all was guarded, and the
help of Divine grace was so ordained that the
stability which was given by Christ to Peter, by
Peter should be bestowed on the rest of the Apostles."
Wherefore, we are always assured, it cannot be but

that a larger measure of that fortitude which, by a
special gift of the Lord, was bestowed on Peter,
should be always given to you as often as you are
present with the person of Peter, who lives in his
successors ; and touch only the soil of this City,
which the toil and the triumphal blood of the sacred
Prince of the Apostles has watered. Nay, venerable
brethren, we have never doubted but that out of the
very tomb where the ashes of blessed Peter rest for
the perpetual veneration of the world, a secret power
and healing virtue goes forth to inspire the pastors
of the Lord's flock with daring strength, great cou-
rage, and nobleness of mind; and this, by renew-
ing their power, makes the bold audacity of the
enemy, which is no match for the virtue and power
of Catholic unity, to sink and fall in a conflict so un-
equal.'

To this the bishops unanimously answered—
' While, looking up to the heavenly Jerusalem, that
rejoices in the glory of her new Saints, we recognise
and set forth the wonderful works of the Lord, we
take part more fervently in the present celebration,
as contemplating, in the solemnity which this day
brings round again, the unshaken firmness of the
Rock whereon our Lord and Saviour built His
Church, solid and perpetual. For we perceive it to
be an effect of the power of God, that the Chair of
Peter, the organ of truth, the centre of unity, the
foundation and bulwark of the Church's freedom,
should have stood firm and unmoved for now eighteen

hundred years complete, amid so many adverse cir-
cumstances, and such constant efforts of its enemies :
that, while kingdoms and empires rose and fell in
turn, it should so have stood, as a secure beacon to
direct men's course through the tempestuous sea of
life, and show, by its light, the safe anchorage and
harbour of salvation.

4 Led by this faith and these feelings, Most Holy
Father, we spoke before, when five years ago, stand-
ing around your throne, we rendered our due tes-
timony to the sublime office you bear, and gave
public expression to our prayers for you, for your
civil princedom, and the cause of right and of religion.
Led by this faith we then professed, both in words
and writing, that nothing was nearer to us, nor
dearer, than to believe and teach those things which
you believe and teach; than to reject those errors
which you reject; than to walk in the ways of the
Lord with one mind, under your guidance ; to follow
you, to labour with you, and with you to contend
in the Lord's cause, at every risk and with whatever
result. All these things, which we then declared, we
now renew and confirm with the deepest filial piety ;
and we desire to testify it to the whole world ; grate-
fully remembering also, and with fullest assent, all
you have done from that time .onward for the good
of the faithful and the glory of the Church.

c For, as Peter said long since, " We cannot but
speak the things we have seen and heard." You have
also held it to be a sacred and solemn duty ; you are

giving manifest proof that you have never held it to
be otherwise. For never has your voice been silent.
You have accounted it to belong to your supreme
office to proclaim eternal verities; to smite with the
sword of your Apostolic utterance the errors of the
time, which threaten to overthrow the natural and
supernatural order of things, and the very founda-
tions of ecclesiastical and civil power; to dispel the
darkness which perverse and novel teachings have
shed over men's souls; and to declare, persuade to,
and approve all that is needful and wholesome to the
individual, to the Christian family, and to civil society :
so that at length all may attain to know what it is
that every Catholic should hold, retain, and profess.
For that exceeding great care we render to your
Holiness the deepest thanks, and with endless grati-
tude ; and, believing that Peter has spoken by the
mouth of Pius, therefore, whatsoever you have
spoken, confirmed, and pronounced for the safe cus-
tody of the deposit, we likewise speak, confirm, and
pronounce; and with one voice and one mind we
reject everything which, as being opposed to Divine
faith, the salvation of souls, and the good of human
society, you have judged fit to reprove and reject.
For that is firmly and deeply established in our con-
sciousness, which the Fathers at Florence defined in
their decree on union, that the Roman Pontiff " is
the Vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church, and
father and teacher of all Christians; and that to
him, in the person of blessed Peter, has been com-

mitted by our Lord Jesus Christ full power to feed,
to rule, and to govern the universal Church."

4 But there are other things beside which excite our
love and gratitude towards you. We admire and
rejoice over the heroic courage with which you have
opposed this world's pernicious stratagems ; and your
efforts to keep the Lord's flock in the way of salva-
tion, to guard it against the seductions of error, and
defend it against the force of the powerful and the
subtlety of the falsely wise. We admire that zeal
which knows no weariness ; with which, embracing in
your apostolic care the peoples of the East and West,
you have never ceased to provide for the good of the
universal Church. We admire the noble spectacle of
the good Shepherd which you afford to the race of
mankind, that is plunging deeper into evil day by
day ; one which strikes the minds of the very enemies
of the truth, and arrests even unwilling eyes by its
intrinsic excellence and dignity.'

By these words the bishops did not confirm the
acts of the Pontiff as if they needed confirmation,
nor accept his declarations of truth arid condemna-
tions of error as if they needed their acceptance.
They did not intend or imply that the supreme
Pontifical acts since 1862, in the form of Allocutions,
Briefs, Encyclicals, and the Syllabus, were of imper-
fect and only inchoate authority until their acceptance
should confirm them. Nothing was further from the
thoughts of the pastors of the Church. They recog-
nised the voice of Peter in the voice of Pius, and the

infallible certainty of all his declarations and condem-
nations, in virtue of the supreme and singular pre-
rogative of Doctor of the Universal Church, given by
our Lord Jesus Christ to Peter, and through Peter
to his successors. They renewed, before the tomb
of the Apostle, the adhesion they had already given,
one by one, in the midst of their flocks, to the succes-
sive utterances of the Sovereign Pontiff, as these,
from time to time, had reached them. The Encyclical
Quanta Cur a, and the Syllabus or compendium of
eighty condemnations in previous encyclicals and
allocutions — all these had been at once received by
them as a part of the supreme teaching of the
Church, through the person of its head, which, by the
special assistance of the Holy Ghost, is preserved from
all error. They did not add certainty to that which
was already infallible.* This act of adhesion was
a recognition of the supreme and plenary office of
the successor of S. Peter, which, as the Council of
Florence denned, he has received in and through the
person of Peter : not by canons, nor by councils, nor
by ecclesiastical institution, as some blindly say, with
the decree refuting them before their eyes, but from
the direct grant and gift of our Lord Jesus Christ,
before as yet a canon was made, or a council assem-
bled.

I have lately seen it affirmed by a Protestant
critic, that the truths and principles which have been

* Gerdil. Per la Bolla Auctorem Fidei. Sez. 2. Art. vii.,
viii., ix. Op. inedit., torn. v. p. 256-259. Napoli, 1855.

here declared are modern : that Ultramontanism,
as it is called, is a novel opinion, and that its rise
is to be ascribed to ' the vulgar ambition of ruling
as a despot over willing slaves/ to 'bureaucratic
despotism with a well-drilled episcopal police/ to ' the
Tarquinian policy of cutting down all the taller poppy-
heads,' to 'watchful jealousy and incessant petty
persecution on the part of the Curia/

We are told that c the first epoch of Ultramontanism
commenced with the Council of Constance, and closed
with the Council of Trent;' that, unfortunately, the
counsels of Pole and Contarini were not followed, and
that but for their failure ' the Teutonic element would
have conquered for itself its natural place and recog-
nition in the development of the Catholic Church.'
The Catholic Church, we are told, became ' the Latin
Church,' which lost the Teutonic element by confirming
its despotic grasp upon the Latin. The great error,
we are taught, was committed by a General Council.
The Council of Constance ' put the cart before the
horse': or, as we should say, it determined the
election of the Pope ; and then, instead of ruling him
and teaching him, it submitted to him as the Vicar of
Christ. The main principle of Ultramontanism,
therefore, was distinctly recognised and put in act
by the Council of Constance. Does any one imagine
that in this the Council of Constance differs from the
Councils of Chalcedon or of Trent, or that its acts
embody any other principles than those of the uni-
versal tradition of Christianity — namely, the supreme

c 2

authority of the successor of S. Peter in ruling and
teaching the whole Church on earth?

As to ' the Teutonic element/ a few words may be
said. It would seem that some suppose the Catholic
Church to be a system, like the Austrian or the
British empire, in which nationalities are to play
their part, balanced by constitutional checks. This
Judaic notion began to rise when the idea of Catholic
unity began to decline. The assimilation of all
national distinctions to a higher type — the extinction,
that is, of nationalities in Christ Jesus — eliminated
Jew and Greek, Teuton and Latin, from the sphere
of faith. It was the rise of modern nationalities which
caused the great Western schism, for the termination of
which the Council of Constance was assembled. The
schism was healed, though the Council of Basle for a
while re-opened it. The national spirit continued still
to work, and in a part of Germany and England grew
to a head, which in the sixteenth century issued in
the Protestant schism. But for the Council of Con-
stance, the greater part of Europe might have been
involved. After the Council of Trent, a part of
Germany, and England and Scotland, fell finally from
the Catholic unity. But ' the Teutonic element ' was
not thereby lost to the Church. More than half of
Germany is Catholic to this day. And the Anglo-
Saxon race, in which Teuton, German, and Celt are
mixed together, is spreading over a large part of the
world. At this moment, the English-speaking episco-
pate of Great Britain and its possessions, with the

United States of America, is more numerous than the
hierarchy of any other race or language. There are not
less than a hundred and sixty or seventy c Teutonic '
bishops in this c Latin Church.' It is a mystery of God's
providence that races and nations once in the Catholic
unity should fall from it. But it was not Ultramon-
tanism which separated the Lutherans of the West, any
more than the Nestorians of the East. It was not the
infallibility of the Pope, ex cathedra, which drove
Protestants into schism. It was the denial of the in-
fallibility of the Church which made them heretics.

We are often and confidently told that 4 Ultramon-
tanism can make little way with thinking men. The
last resource is to appeal to the credulity or the igno-
rance of those who are afraid to think ; and here lies
the true explanation of that perplexing blunder, the
Encyclical of 1864.'

The 'perplexing blunder' of 1864 gives me the occa-
sion for which I have been waiting. In the touching
recital of the last days of our illustrious Cardinal, we
read these words. Hearing that some of the French
bishops had ordered the Encyclical to be read
to the people, he said : ' I am very glad the French
bishops are standing out so bravely for the liberties
of the Church. That will console the Holy Father
very much.' He added that he had hoped to say
something on it. ( The French bishops have spoken,
but as yet I have said nothing.'*

* 'Cardinal Wiseman's Last Illness/ pp. 24, 25 (Burns).

I have felt that this duty devolves as an heirloom
upon me ; and it has been my intention to treat of
the Encyclical and Syllabus fully and explicitly. But
the urgency of other duties has delayed it till now ;
and I have been compelled to content myself with
publishing those two Pontifical acts in our fifth
Diocesan Synod, as a part of the supreme and infal-
lible teaching of the Church, both in the declarations
and in the condemnations contained in them.

And now that half the Episcopate of the Church has
spoken, proclaiming that, from the moment the voice
of Peter reached them, all the declarations and con-
demnations of his successor were to them the rule of
their teaching, I know not what I have to add.
Nevertheless, I may hope at a future day to treat of
some of the propositions of the Syllabus which are
either most assailed, or nearest in their bearing upon
us. I have no hesitation in saying that the Encyclical
and Syllabus of 1864 are among the greatest acts of
this Pontificate. The Encyclicals which preceded them
had condemned many of the chief anti- Christian and
anti-social errors of the day. They had prepared for
the unanimous declaration of the Episcopate in 1862,
on the subject of the temporal power, to which after-
wards the whole number of the absent bishops ad-
hered. Deny it who may, that act stemmed the tide
of public opinion in Europe. It extinguished within
the unity of the Church the few who murmured
against the temporal power, or spoke laxly or
erroneously about it. The unanimity of Catholics

told upon those without, and a change of tone is per-
ceptible since that date. Next came the Encyclical
and Syllabus, which summed up in one act the de-
clarations of so many years, giving them a new pro-
mulgation and a sensible accession of power over the
minds, not only of the faithful, but even of opponents,
by the concentrated force and weight of their applica-
tion. This, again, prepared for the declaration of the
bishops at this Centenary of S. Peter's Day. Every
bishop in the world had the Encyclical and Syllabus
in his hands. Upon that summary of the acts of this
whole Pontificate five hundred bishops proclaim their
adhesion to every declaration and every condemnation
therein contained, and to every other act of doctrinal
authority since their last assembly in Rome. It is
the Encyclical and Syllabus which gives such force
and import to the words of the episcopate the other
day. It is the basis of their Salutation, as they style
the address. It will be also the basis and the guide
of the General Council, prescribing and directing its
deliberations and decrees. That it should be ' per-
plexing ' to those who refuse to learn of the Church
throughout the world is not wonderful. Light is
perplexing to eyes that are only half open, or, from
disease, are again half shut. The greatest blunder in
the world's eyes is Catholicism : the next greatest is
Christianity. Ultramontanism is Catholic Christianity.
I will make but one more remark on these popular
errors, on which already I have said more than their
intrinsic worth demands. We are told : c In one Roman

Catholic country the struggle between the rival sys-
tems was continued for two centuries after the Refor-
mation ; and the great name of Bossuet is not more
illustrious for his eloquence than for his bold vindica-
tion of the national as opposed to the ultramontane
theory of Catholicism.7 There is a truth in this pas-
sage. Gallicanism is nationalism: that which the
Gospel casts out; that which grew up again in me-
diaeval Christendom. It is the Christian Judaism
which strove to elect its own High Priest ; the national
factions which rent the Sacred College ; the nationalism
which set up two or three uncanonical Popes, and
two or three national obediences ; the spirit of egotism,
worldliness, and avarice, which caused whole nations of
Europe to apostatise from the Divine will, from the
unity of the Church, and to erect Lutheranism, Cal-
vinism, and Anglicanism on the schismatical basis of
national Churches. The same spirit in France tempted
Louis XIV. and a handful of courtiers, ecclesiastical
and civil, to the verge of schism, from which they
were saved by the. authority of the Pontiff, by the
Catholic fidelity of the majority of the French bishops,
and by the Catholic instincts of the French people.
The great name of Bossuet, as I will show, was
darkened by his contact with this error, and might
have incurred a censure which would have attached
to it for ever. Much as we respect the memory of
Bossuet, reverence for the Divine order of the Church
constrains us not to praise him when his illustrious
name is under a cloud.

The boldness or the unconsciousness with which
Gallicanism is sometimes put forward as an opinion
which Catholics are free to hold without blame, and
as a basis on which Churches are to unite under the
shelter of Bossuet, and as a standard of Catholic
moderation in rebuke of Ultramontane excesses,
makes it seasonable to tell its history. Gallicanism
is no more than a transient and modern opinion
which arose in France, without warrant or antece-
dents in the antient theological schools of the great
French Church : a royal theology, as suddenly deve-
loped and as parenthetical as the Thirty-nine Articles ;
affirmed only by a small number out of the nume-
rous episcopate of France, indignantly rejected by
many of them; condemned in succession by three
Pontiffs; declared by the Universities of Louvain
and Douai to be erroneous ; retracted by the Bishops
of France; condemned by Spain, Hungary, and other
countries, and condemned over again in the bull
4 Auctorem Fidei.' To this may be added, that the
name of Bossuet escaped censure only out of indul-
gence, by reason of his great services to the Church ;
and that even the lawfulness of giving absolution to
those who defend the Gallican Articles, has been
gravely questioned.

To justify these assertions, I will briefly give the
proofs ; with the references, which may be easily con-
sulted.

In order to maintain against Innocent XI. the pre-
tended claims of the Eegale in matters of ecclesiastical

benefice, Louis XIV. commanded the bishops and
clergy to assemble in 1682. Thirty-four bishops out
of a hierarchy of some hundred and twenty assembled.
A majority of these — not all, for it is known that De
Brias, Archbishop of Cambray, resisted — passed the
four famous Gallican Articles, and published them on
the 19th of March.* They were immediately con-

* Zaccaria Antifebronius Vindicatus, Dissert Y. c. v. 2.
Romae 1848.

The following account, given by Fenelon, respecting the part
taken by Bossuet in the Articles of 1682, is too interesting to be
omitted : —

* Bossuet, Bishop of Meaux, lately deceased, often narrated to
me, before witnesses worthy of confidence, the things which
passed in the Assembly of the Gallican Clergy in 1682. The
narrative was as follows :

' Choiseul, Bishop of Tournai, had been chosen to draw up
the Declaration of the Gallican Clergy on the authority of the
Pope. He wrote it, and it was read. At once Bossuet strongly
opposed him, because he declared that both the Apostolic See and
the Pope personally might fall into heresy. Choiseul answered :
Unless you say so, whether you will or no, you necessarily affirm
the infallibility of Rome. Bossuet replied : But you cannot
deny that the faith of Peter shall never fail in his See. That is
clearly proved by the promises ; that is most evident from uni-
versal tradition. If that be so, Choiseul said, absolute infalli-
bility is ascribed not indeed to the man who sits in the See, but
to the See itself. And so it must be admitted that every decree
which emanates from the Apostolic See is altogether irrefor-
mable, and confirmed by infallible authority.

' Bossuet tried to answer the objection in this way : The faith
of this See is indeed indefectible ; nevertheless its judgments are
not infallible. How do you prove, Choiseul asked, that the faith
of this See is indefectible ? I prove it, said Bossuet, from the
promises of Christ ; forasmuch as Christ expressly says, " I have
prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not." This is the faith of
Peter, which shall never fail in his See

demned by the University of Lou vain. They were
assailed by the theologians of Liege. The professors
of Douai at once petitioned the King that they might

' While Choiseul endeavoured to refute these arguments, Bos-
suet urged him sharply. He said, with a peremptory voice,
Answer: can the Apostolic See become heretical or not ? What-
ever you say will be contrary to yourself. If you say that the
Apostolic See can become heretical, and, in defending its heresy,
schismatical, then by your doctrine it may come to pass, that the
head of the Church may be torn from the body, and the truncated
body become lifeless ; and therefore the centre of unity in faith
become the centre of corrupt belief and of heresy. But if you
say, this See cannot fail in the faith, of which it is the centre
and head, therefore the faith of this See is indefectible.

'After much direct controversy of the same kind, Choiseul
added : Under this milder name of indefectibility you are in-
sinuating that very infallibility of the Ultramontanes which you
deny, and most dangerously delude yourself. Show therefore
precisely and clearly in what this indefectibility of yours differs
from that Ultramontane infallibility. The Bishop of Meaux
answered, that it was promised to the Apostolic See that it
should be for ever the foundation, centre, and head of the
Catholic Church, and that therefore it could never become
schismatical or heretical, like many Oriental Churches, which,
once enjoying Catholic communion, had at length lapsed into
schism and heresy. It is proved by the promises (these are
Bossuet's words), that to the Apostolic See this can never
happen.

'When this altercation between the two bishops ended, the
Bishop of Tournai withdrew from the office of drawing up the
Declaration. The Bishop of Meaux was substituted to fulfil this
duty, and immediately drew up the Four Propositions as they
exist at this day.

' These are the particulars which witnesses worthy of confi-
dence, and still living, have with me very often heard narrated
by the Bishop of Meaux.'

Fenelon, De Summi Pontificis Auctoritate, c. 7.
CEuvres completes de Fenelon. Vol. ii.
Paris, 1852.

not be required to affirm the propositions ; they
declared that they and all the faithful ' detested the
doctrine in respect to ecclesiastical power contained
in the declaration of the Gallican clergy ;' they affirmed
these opinions, which are destructive of the absolute
primacy and infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff, to be
erroneous ; and that they should believe themselves to
be numbered among schismatics if they were to dero-
gate from the supreme authority of the Vicar instituted
by Jesus Christ, in defining what doctrine is sound and
true, and what is false and evil. ' We have consulted,7
they add, 4 the most learned theologians, both regular
and secular ; and we have not as yet been able to find
even one solid ground to form a conscience which
would dictate the lawfulness of teaching these propo-
sitions/ In Spain, the Inquisition issued a decree in
which each proposition was branded with a particular
censure. In Hungary, in the year 1686, the proposi-
tions were condemned in the following words. After

Fenelon, in refuting Bossuet's opinion, says :

* The great use of the controversy between the Bishops of
Tournai and Meaux is as follows : that out of their propositions
may be constructed an invincible argument for the Apostolic See.
The major is laid down by the Bishop of Tournai, the minor is
defended by the Bishop of Meaux ; the conclusion is mine, and
is inevitable. The indefectibility in faith of the Apostolic See,
.... said the Bishop of Tournai, is identical with the doctrine
which the moderate school of Transalpines labour to prove, under
the less mild name of infallibility. But the indefectibility of
faith in this See, answered the Bishop of Meaux, can be denied
by no instructed Catholic.

1 Therefore, I say, this gift promised by God, which Cisalpines
call indefectibility, and Transalpines call infallibility, can be
denied by no instructed Catholic.' — Ibid. c. 8.

describing the four propositions as ' absurd to Chris-
tian ears, simply detestable,' the plenary Council of
Hungary proceeds : c After invoking the name of God
with our venerable brethren the bishops, with the
abbots, provosts, chapters, and professors of theology
and of the sacred canons, we condemn and proscribe
the four propositions aforesaid, and we interdict and
prohibit all the faithful of the kingdom from reading,
retaining, much more from teaching them, until the
infallible sentence of the Apostolic See, to which alone,
by a Divine and immutable privilege, it belongs to
judge of such questions of faith, shall have been pub-
lished.' Add to this, that even the theological faculty
of Paris refused to accept the propositions.*

But we must proceed to higher condemnations.
The acts of the Gallican Assembly were no sooner
published than they were condemned. On April
llth of the same year 1682 — that is, three weeks
after they appeared — Innocent XI. addressed the
Brief Paternae Charitati to the bishops of France,
of which the two following passages will suffice : —
4 That part of your letter in which it is said that you,
yielding your own rights, conferred them upon the
King, we could not read without horror of mind ; as if
you were the masters, not the guardians, of the Churches
committed to your care, and as if those Churches and
their rights could be subjected to the yoke of the
secular power by the bishops, who ought for the
liberty of those Churches to go into bondage/ And

* Zaccaria Antifebronius Vindicatus, Dissert V. c. v. 5, note.

again : ' Wherefore, by these present letters, by the
authority delivered to us by Almighty God, we con-
demn, rescind, and annul whatsoever was done in
your assemblies in the matter of the Regale, together
with all its consequences, and whatsoever hereafter
may be attempted, and we declare the same to be for
ever null and void ; although, forasmuch as they are
in themselves manifestly null, they need no annul-
ment or declaration of this kind.' *

To Innocent XI. succeeded Alexander VIII., who
in 1688 condemned as temerarious, scandalous, ill-
sounding, proximate to heresy, erroneous, schismatical,
and heretical, twenty-one propositions, of which one
was as follows : — ' The assertion of the authority of
the Roman Pontiff over (Ecumenical Councils, and of
his infallibility in questions of faith, is futile, and has
been often refuted. 'f

In 1690 he signed the Constitution Inter Multiplices,
but deferred its publication, in the hope that the
Court and clergy of France would retract the Galli-
can propositions. But in January 1691, being on
his death-bed, he summoned twelve cardinals and two
proton otaries apostolic, and in their presence promul-
gated the Constitution, in which, after reciting the
whole cause, the Pope proceeds^as follows : — ' We who
have been constituted by the Lord to be the vindica-
tors in this world of the rights of the Church, medi-
tating on these things day and night in the bitterness

* Romanus Pontifex tanquam Primas Eccles. Eoskovany,
torn. ii. pp. 223-227. Nitrise et Comaromii, 1867.
t Ibid. p. 239.

of our soul, have lifted up our hands with tears and
sighs to the Lord, and have besought Him with all our
heart that He would be with us in the power of His
grace, in order that we may be able effectually to
fulfil our duty in so arduous an act of the apostolic
office committed to us : and moved by the thought
lest we, who are soon to render account of our
stewardship to the Supreme Judge, should be con-
victed of negligence in the trust committed to us'
— 'following in the footsteps of Innocent, our pre-
decessor of happy memory, who,' — 'in certain letters
in the form of brief, on the llth day of April 1682,
condemned, rescinded, and annulled whatsoever was
done in the aforesaid assemblies in the affair of the
Regale — of our own motion we declare and decree
that all and every one of the things which were
done in the aforesaid assemblies of the Gallican
clergy in the year 1682, as well concerning the exten-
sion of the Regale as also concerning the declaration
in respect to the ecclesiastical power, and the four pro-
positions contained therein, together with all and each
of the mandates, arrests, &c., are by the force of law
null, invalid, and void, and destitute of all force and
effect from the first, and now, and hereafter* . . .' &c.
Dated on the 4th day of August 1690, and published
as above in January 1691. At the same time, and from
his death-bed, the Pontiff addressed to Louis XIV. a
pathetic letter of paternal authority, in which he says :

* Romanus Pontifex tanquam Primas Eccles. Roskovany,
torn. ii. p. 237. Nitriae et Comaromii, 1867.

; While we are standing upon the awful confines of
this mortal life, and meditating on the account we must
give of the supreme administration of the Church of
God which has been committed to us, to the strict
Judge Who is knocking at the door, we have deemed
it to be altogether our duty to declare null and void
all things, with all their consequences, past and future,
which some years ago were done and declared in thy
kingdom against the rights of churches, persons, and
foundations in the same kingdom, and also against the
authority of the Roman Pontiff, the Apostolic See,
and the Universal Church, as will manifestly appear
from the brief promulgated on the subject.' *

To Alexander VIII. succeeded Innocent XII. , in
whose time the contest with the King of France
was terminated. In the letter of Louis XIV. to the
Pontiff, on his elevation, the King retracted the acts
of 1682 in these words: — 'And, inasmuch as I
desire to testify (my filial respect) by the most
effectual proofs in my power, I most gladly make
known to your Holiness that I have given the
necessary commands that the things contained in my
edict of the 22nd day of March 1682, concerning
the declaration of the Gallican clergy (to which past
circumstances drove me), shall not be observed.' f

It was also required that the bishops of France who
had participated in those acts should retract the same.

* Roskovany ut supra, torn. ii. p. 239.

f Ibid. p. 240. The French text is given by Sfondratus,
Regale Sacerdotium. Appendix.

This they did in a letter to Innocent XII., in which
they say : ' We declare that we vehemently, and be-
yond all that can be expressed, lament from our hearts
the acts which were done in the aforesaid assemblies,
which have so profoundly displeased your Holiness
and your predecessors. And therefore, whatsoever
things can be held as decreed by those assemblies
respecting the ecclesiastical power and the authority
of the Pontiffs, we hold as not decreed, and declare
that they ought so to be esteemed/ Lastly, they con-
clude as follows :— c Meanwhile, to your Holiness,
as to the successor of blessed Peter, Prince of the
Apostles, to the Vicar of Christ our Lord, and to the
Head of the whole Church militant, that same true
and sincere obedience which we have already pro-
mised, we again promise, vow, and swear.' *

Further, the same might be confirmed by the
allocution of Innocent XII., and the briefs of Clement
XL of June 15 and August 31, in 1706. But
enough has been said. I will add only the three
following facts : — First, that in the Constitution
Auctorem Fidei, Pius VI. condemns the Synod of
Pistoia for incorporating the four Gallican Articles
in its decrees, expressly because they had been already
condemned by Pontifical authority ; and declares that
the insertion of those Articles in the Synod was
1 temerarious, scandalous, and greatly injurious to the
Apostolic See.' f

* Roskovany ut supra, torn. ii. p. 24-3.

t * Multo fortius exigit a nobis pastoralis sollicitudo recentem

Secondly, it is certain that the illustrious Bishop
of Meaux has only escaped an explicit censure for
his part in the four Propositions of 1682, through
the benign and paternal forbearance of the Holy
See. Benedict XIV., in a letter to the Grand In-
quisitor hi Spain, on the subject of the works of
Cardinal Henry Norris, adds : ' No doubt a work
will be known to you, printed and published not
many years ago, which, though it bears no author's
name, all men well know to be by Bossuet, Bishop
of Meaux, which he had written at the command
of Louis XIV., King of France, but left hi manu-
script in certain libraries. The whole work is taken
up with asserting the Propositions affirmed by the
Gallican clergy in the Assembly of 1682. It is
difficult, indeed, to find any other work equally op-
posed to the doctrine, which is received everywhere
out of France, concerning the infallibility of the
Supreme Pontiff, when defining ex cathedra, his
superiority over (Ecumenical Councils, his indirect
power, if the high interests of religion and the Church
require, over the supreme power of temporal princes.
In the time of Clement XII. of happy memory, our
immediate predecessor, there was serious consideration
of proscribing the work ; and at length it was decided
to refrain from proscribing it, not only on account of

horum factam in synodo tot vitiis affectam adoptionem, velut
temerariam, scandalosam, ac prsesertim, post edita prsedecessoruin
nostrorum decreta, huic Apostolicse Sedi summopere injuriosam,
reprobare ac daranare.' — Const. Pii VI. Auctorem Fidei, s. Ixxxv.

the memory of an author who had deserved well in
so many points respecting religion, but on account of
the just fear of new dissensions.' *

Thirdly, it is to be remembered that, so far from
Gallicanism being an opinion open and recognised,
which theologians and Catholics may hold and teach
as freely as any other, it has been a question whether
they who defend the four Articles after the re-
peated Pontifical condemnations are capable of sacra-
mental absolution. c N., a confessor in France, asks
whether he can and ought to absolve those ecclesias-
tics who refuse to submit themselves to the condem-
nation which the Holy See promulgated, of the four
celebrated propositions of the Gallican clergy.' The
reply was as follows : c After diligently weighing the
question proposed, the S. Penitentiaria decided in
answer ; The declaration of the Gallican Assembly in
the year 1682 was indeed condemned by the Holy
See, and the acts of the Assembly were rescinded,
and declared to be null and void; but no note of
theological censure was affixed to the doctrine con-
tained in that declaration : wherefore nothing hinders
that sacramental absolution be given to the priests
who in good faith, and being so persuaded in mind,
still adhere to that doctrine, so they be otherwise
worthy of absolution. — Kome, Sept. 27, 1825.' f
From this, two things are evident. First, that if a

* Bullarium Ben. XIV. ed. Mechlin, xiii. Suppl. p. 105.
f Scavini Theol. Moral. Univ., torn. iv. pp. 297-8, ed.
Milan. 1865.

note of theological censure had been attached to
those propositions, no one could hold them without
sin. And secondly, that good faith is required to
clear a person of fault in holding opinions which
have been condemned by the Holy See, although no
such note of censure be attached.

Such is the history of the origin and immediate
condemnation of the Gallican opinions. They had
110 antecedent traditions, no roots in the theology of
the great Church of France. Cardinal Aguirre has
abundantly shown that the Saints, doctors, episcopate,
and schools of France taught one uniform doctrine
with the Church of all other countries, as to the
supremacy and infallibility of the Chair and successor
of Peter. The Gallicanism of 1682 was a feeble
imitation of the preamble of the 24th of Henry VIII.,
by which the schism of England was accomplished.
The four Articles were imposed by Royal decree upon
universities and schools, and continued to infect the
teaching of France down to the end of the last cen-
tury, as morbid humours run long in the blood.
But the terrible scourge of the great Revolution
finally expelled this and many other diseases engen-
dered by the royal and secular corruption of the old
French monarchy. The Acts of 1682 were succeeded
by the Organic Articles ; and the hierarchy and clergy
of France have learned by a terrible and glorious con-
flict to rest upon the only Rock of ecclesiastical unity
and truth. From time to time, here and there, the
Gallican spirit may have shown itself, but in mitigated

and more temperate forms. The revolution of 1830
again passed over the Church in France. Its rejection
by the State threw it finally upon the Holy See ; and
though royal and imperial influences have at times
striven to warp the minds of a few distinguished
prelates, the hierarchy of France has borne a fore-
most and a noble testimony to the supremacy, infal-
libility, and sovereignty of the Chair and successor
of St. Peter. The Church in France of to-day is in
perfect harmony with the theology of its ancient
councils and doctors,* of S. Bernard, S. Anselm,

* Peter de Marca, Archbishop of Paris, speaking of the
Jesuits, who had publicly maintained the infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff, says : ' This is the opinion which alone is taught
in Spain, Italy, and all other provinces of Christendom ; so that
the other, which is called the opinion of the Parisian School, is to
be referred to that class of opinions which is tolerated. . . . The
authority of pronouncing an infallible sentence in causes of faith
is ascribed to the Supreme Pontiff by the consent of all universi-
ties, excepting only the ancient Sorbonne,' that is, in the time when
Gerson began to sow the seeds of the contrary opinion. De Marca
adds, * The majority of Doctors, not only in Theology but even
of Laws, adhere to the common opinion as resting upon founda-
tions most difficult to disturb, and deride the opinion of the old
Sorbonne.' Gonzalez De Infall. Roman. Pontiff, disp. xvii. § 2.
Aguirre, Defensio Cath. S. Petri, disp. vii. §§ 1, 2, 3. The same
is abundantly proved by Soardi, De Suprema Rom. Pont. Auct.,
Praef. viii,, ix.

Neque quemquam alium e Theologis Parisiensibus alicuius
nominis allegatum invenio pro eadem opinione, saltern ex iis qui
scripserunt usque ad initium huius sasculi, quin et Theophilus
ipse loco citato, puncto 11 initio, testatur, demptis iis paucis,
nimirum, Gersone, Petro Alliacensi, et Jacobo Almaino, caeteros
pene omnes docere, definitiones Pontificum in iis quaestionibus
esse fide divina certas. — Aguirre, Def. Catlied. S. Petri. Tract. 1,
Disp. vii. § 9.

S. Thomas, and S. Bonaventure, who owed their
nurture to her schools, and especially of the ancient
University of Paris, where Gallicanism was unknown
till the first seeds were sown by Gerson, in the fifteenth
century. The stream of Catholic tradition is too
deep and strong in that great people to be turned
aside by so slight an obstruction. Its course was
troubled for a while; but Gallicanism is now car-
ried away by the return of the ancient and lineal
belief. The prelates of France are at this time as
little likely to return to the four propositions of

Nullus enim eousque, nisi forte heterodoxus aut schismaticus,
invenitur, qui auctoritatem infallibilem negaverit Romano Ponti-
fici, quoties ex cathedra sedis Apostolical definit aliquid, tamquam
credendum ab omnibus fidelibus circa fidem aut mores, ut diserte
ostendit Ruardus Tapper Orat. 3. Theologica Columna 8 pag.
mini 339, ubi testatur opinionem contrariam fuisse noviter intro-
ductam a quibusdam Parisiensium, contra doctrinam veterum
omnium scriptorum, qui Romani Pontificis iudicium in quaestioni-
bus fidei esse prorsus infallibile concorditer ex Scripturis tradunt.
Itaque allegatione praedictorum, sive Patrum Galliae, sive Con-
ciliorum, sive Theologorum Parisiensium, et quorumlibet aliorum
antiquiorum Concilio Constantiensi supersedeo, ne actum agam.
—Ibid. § 13, ad fin.

' Cette idee nouvelle. qui represente un ordre de choses diame-
tralement contraire a ce que le mot exprime, puisque, en realite,
sous le nom pompeux de libertes de 1'jSglise gallicane se cachait
1'oppression la plus tyrannique de cette meme Eglise par le
pouvoir civil, est eclose en France, dans le seizieme siecle. Le
veritable noyau de ces pretendues libertes, c'etaient ces memes
tendances schismatiques que nous avons deja signalees, formulees
en maximes legislatives, auxquelles on avait ajoute quelques
particularites reelles ou imaginaires de la discipline ecclesiastique
de France.' — Phillips, Du Droit Eccl. torn. iii. p. 194.

Bossuet, as the Royal Astronomers are to the Ptole-
maic system. The world has moved onward, and the
Church has released itself from the servitude of royal
patrons. The voice which went forth from the whole
French episcopate when Pius IX. called upon them
to contend with him for the rights and liberties of
the Chair of Peter, and again when he published to
the world the Encyclical and Syllabus of 1864, is
proof of the profound adherence of the bishops in
France to the supreme prerogatives of the Vicar of
Christ, which the world calls Ultramontanism.

And now, lest it should be thought that what
has here been said is remote from our present needs
and duty, I will add the reasons which prompted me to
dwell upon these topics. The one is, that a full and
perfect belief of the authority of the faith is essential
to the mission of the Church, especially in England;
the other is, that the convoking of a General Council
makes this subject timely, for reasons I will endeavour
to give hereafter.

It is certain that the action of Catholic truth upon
England has been weakened by the Gallican opinions.
Although it is both true and self-evident that Gallicans
maintain the infallibility of the Church ; nevertheless
the inconsistency of their theories, their incompati-
bility with the whole action and attitude of the
Holy See, and the divisions they have apparently
introduced among Catholics, have hindered the full
effect of the Catholic theology upon the public
opinion of this country. False as it is, nevertheless

the retort, ' What is the use of infallibility if you
do not know where it resides ?' has sufficed for
two centuries to evade the force of the argument
in which both Ultramontanes and Gallicans are
agreed. A year ago, we had a notable proof of
this. Bossuet's position was claimed as the justifica-
tion for rejecting the unity and infallibility of the
Universal Church. So long as these relics of the
theology of a few French courtiers are suffered to
pass without censure, we shall be exposed to this
irrelevant but popular retort. Now I am well aware
that Gallicanism has no place among us. It has no
existence in any of our colleges; it is not to be
found in our clergy, secular or regular. It has no
part in our laity. The faithful in England are united
to the Holy See with all their hearts and minds.
There is between it and them no national or worldly
interest to warp or to sway them. The highest,
purest, and truest conception of the office of the
Church, and of its head, as the Divinely-appointed
channel of the faith, and as the guide of men in the way
of salvation, is either explicitly or implicitly the faith
which governs the Catholic Church in England. The
Reformation has robbed it of the multitude of souls
who ought to be its children ; but it has, at least, de-
livered it from the personal, local, national, and secular
traditions which infect and weaken the tone and spirit
of some Catholic countries. England and Ireland
are debtors, above all people, to bear their testimony
to the highest and purest Catholic truth. In propor-

tion as we do so, the English people will listen to us.
They have no sympathy in accommodations or com-
promises. Downright truth, boldly and broadly
stated, like the ring of true metal, wins their confi-
dence. If we believe the Holy Spirit of God to
guide and to speak through the Church, by whom
shall we hear His voice if not by the Head of the
Church, in whom the plenitude of authority resides ?
The intimate relation of this question with the
deepest and most vital parts of religion may be seen
from the fact that it belongs to the subject of
Divine Faith. The infallibility of the Church
is the ordinary medium through which the material
object, that is, the doctrine, of Divine faith becomes
known to us. It is, therefore, of the highest
necessity that we should clearly understand what is
that medium, or order, which God has ordained for
the promulgation and perpetuity of His revelation.
The dotes, or endowments, of the Church and the
prerogatives of its head, as the teacher of the
Church, enter therefore directly into the subject of
Faith. They are not mere ecclesiastical, nor, as
many say, constitutional or external questions. They
involve the certainty upon which we know what God
has revealed ; and therefore, if in one aspect they may
be included in the treatise De Ecclesia, they belong
intrinsically to the treatise De Fide Divina. It was
the violation of this Divine economy which let in
the flood of error upon our country. It is the restora-
tion of this Divine economy in the intellect and the

conscience of men that will restore it to the truth. Let
it not, then, be imagined that this subject is remote
from our pastoral work ; or that we can declare the
truth, or guide souls as we ought, unless we clearly
and firmly comprehend the Divine procedure in
revealing and perpetuating the faith of Jesus
Christ.

Thus much I have thought it well to say,
because it would seem that the authoritative con-
demnation of Gallicanism, though known to stu-
dents, and publicly notorious in days nearer to
the event, has appeared to be at times forgotten.
It has been thought to be a probable and time-
honoured opinion, deriving itself from a high anti-
quity, and protected by great names. The episcopal
spirit of English Protestantism has made it very
acceptable in this country: and it has, indeed, no
little affinity to it. The opinion which limits the
prerogative of infallibility to S. Peter, and denies it
to his successors, is, as Orsi* well points out, akin to
that which admits the primacy of S. Peter, and
denies it to his successors. The consequence of the
latter opinion is to introduce anarchy in the place
of order. The consequence of the former opin-
ion is to introduce doubt in the place of certainty.
The Divine order has united the supremacy of truth
and of jurisdiction in the same person; and from the
tradition of Fathers and Councils, it is evident that

* De Rom. Pontif. Auctoritate, torn. ii. 337.

the whole Church has believed the successor and the
See of Peter to be not only supreme in power, but
infallible in faith.

It is upon this basis that the decrees and declara-
tions of the Pontiffs teaching ex cathedra bind the
universal Church, not only to exterior submission but
also to interior assent. Sfondratus expresses this
truth as follows : —

4 The Pontiff does some things as man, some as
prince, some as doctor, some as pope ; that is, as head
and foundation of the Church : and it is only to these
(last-named) actions that we attribute the gift of
infallibility. The others we leave to his human con-
dition. As, then, not every action of the pope is
papal, so not every action of the pope enjoys the
papal privilege.'

4 This, then, is to act as Pontiff, and to speak ex
cathedra, which is not within the competency of any
(other) doctor or bishop.' *

Gregory de Yalentia teaches that, c As often as the
Roman Pontiff uses in defining questions of faith the
authority with which he is invested, the judgment

Quid sit Pontificem e Cathedra docere.

' Pontifex aliqua facit ut homo, aliqua ut Princeps, aliqua ut
Doctor, aliqua ut Papa, hoc est, ut caput et fundamentum
Ecclesia3 : et his solis actionibus privilegium infallibilitatis adscri-
bimus : alias humanse conditioni relinquimus : sicut ergo non
omnis actio Papae est Papalis, ita non omnis actio Papae Papali
privilegio gaudet.

« Hoc ergo est, pontificem agere, et e Cathedra loqui, quod nulli
doctorum aut episcoporum convenit.' — Sfondrati Regale Sacer-
dotium, lib. iii. sec. 1.

which he decrees to be the judgment of faith ought
to be received by all the faithful, by divine precept,
as a doctrine of faith. And he is to be believed to
use that authority, so often as, in controversies of
faith, he determines an opinion in such a way as to
oblige the whole Church to receive it.' * Gonzalez
says : ' Precisely the same is to be said of the Roman
Pontiff, whenever he speaks to the whole Church
from the Chair of Peter, and expounds to it, as supreme
doctor, what it must believe as Catholic doctrine,
what it must avoid as heretical falsity ; what teaching
it is to embrace as sound, what it is to beware of as
noxious; and whenever, in his office of universal
pastor, he points out to the sheep committed to him
by Christ the pastures of virtues on the one hand,
that they may be fed by them to everlasting life, and
the poisonous growth of vices on the other, lest by
tasting them they should bring upon themselves
everlasting death. Under this view, then, we are
to lay down and prove in the present treatise, by
various arguments, as a thing most certain, that
the Roman Pontiff, when he addresses the universal
Church from the Chair of Peter, as the common

* Quotiescumque Romanus Pontifex in fidei quaestionibus de-
fin iendis, ilia qua est praeditus auctoritate utitur, ab omnibus
fidelibus tanquam doctrina fidei recipi divino praecepto debet ea
sententia, quam ille decernit esse sententiam fidei. Toties autem
eum ipsa auctoritate uti credendum est, quoties in controversia
fidei, sic alterutram sententiam determinat, ut ad earn recipiendam
obligare velit universalem Ecclesiam. — Greg, de Val. disp. v. q. 1.
De Objectis Fidei, p. vii. q. 6.

.teacher and supreme judge of questions appertaining
to faith and morals, can never err. For to us
it appears evident, either that there is no supreme
judge in an assembly, or that the office belongs
to him who presides over the whole; so that, in
fact, it is not less certain, to our minds, that the
Pontiff speaking ex cathedrd to the whole Church
cannot err, than that the Pontiff presides over the
whole Church.'*

Suarez is equally explicit: 'Nevertheless, it is a
Catholic truth, that the Pontiff defining ex cathedrd
is the rule of faith, which cannot err, when he autho-
ritatively propounds anything to the whole Church,
as to be believed of divine faith : such is the teaching

* ' Idem prorsus de Romano Pontifice dicendum est, quoties e
Cathedra Petri totam Ecclesiam alloquitur, eique ceu supremus
Doctor exponit, quid tanquam Catholicum dogma credere debeat,
quid tanquam hsereticum figmentum vitare : quam doctrinam
amplecti ceu sanam, quam cavere ceu noxiam : et quoties, pro
universalis Pastoris officio, commissis a Christo sibi ovibus salu-
bria hinc demonstrat pascua virtutum, ut ad immortalem iis
vitam alantur ; venenifera inde vitiorum, ne iis degustandis sempi-
ternam sibi mortem consciscant.

* Juxta hunc itaque sensum probandum statuendumque nobis
in hac Tractatione omni argumentorum genere est, tanquam
omnino certum, Romanum Pontificem, dum e Cathedra Petri
universam Ecclesiam, ceu communis Magister, et supremus quees-
tionum ad mores atque fidem spectaatium Judex alloquitur,
errare neutiquam posse. Evidens namque nobis apparet, vel
nullum in aliquo ccetu supremum Judicem esse, vel hoc munus ad
eum, qui toti prseest coetui, pertinere ; ut sane non certum minus
nobis sit, Pontificem e Cathedra toti Ecelesiae loquentem en-are
non posse, ac certum sit, Pontificem toti Ecclesise praeesse.'—
Gonzalez de Infallibilitate Rom. Pontif. Disp. i. sect. 1.

of all Catholic doctors at this day, and it is, I think,
a thing certain by faith/

4 But the said Kogerus ventured to answer, both as
to this definition (that of Boniface VIII. in Extrav.
44 Unam Sanctam," " De Major," etc.) and as to other
pontifical decrees, that it is not certain de fide that
the Pontiff defining without a General Council cannot
err. But this answer is not only rash in the ex-
treme, but also erroneous: for although formerly
some Catholic doctors may have doubted or erred in
this without pertinacity, yet at this day there is so
consistent an agreement in the Church, and so con-
current a sense of Catholic writers as to this truth,
that it is in no wise lawful to call it in question.' *

So also Sylvius teaches : 4 The answer is certain
de fide, that the judgment of the Eoman Pontiff
is infallible in determining matters of faith. So

* ' Nihilominus veritas Catholica est, Pontificem definientem
ex Cathedra esse regulam fidei, quse errare non potest, quando
aliquid authentic^ proponit universse Ecclesise, tanquam de fide
divina credendum ; ita decent hoc tempore omnes Catholic!
doctores, et censeo, esse rem de fide certain.' — Suarez, Disp. v. de
Fide, sect. 8, n. 4.

* At vero tarn de hac definitione (Bonifacii VIII. in Extravag.
" Unam Sanctam," " De Major :" &c.) quam de aliis decretis Pon-
tificum ausus est dictus Rogerus respondere, non esse de fide
certum, Pontificem definientem sine Concilio General! non posse
errare. Sed est responsio, non solum nimis temeraria, sed etiam
erronea : nam licet olim fortasse aliqui Doctores Catholic! sine
pertinacia in hoc dubitaverint, vel erraverint, jam vero tarn est
conMans Ecclesias consensus, et Catholicorum scriptorum concors
de hac veritate sententia, ut earn in dubium revocare, nullo modo
liceat.' — Suarez, De Fide, disp. xx. s. 3. num. 22.

that when he defines ex cathedrd, or when as
Pontiff he proposes to the Church anything to be
believed of faith, he can in no case err, whether he
defines with a General Council or without it.' *

Duval, of the Sorbonne, says : ' No one can deny
that the proposition, " the Pontiff as Pontiff can
decree contrary to the faith," opens a way to dis-
obedience, and gives occasion to doubt of many
things which have been already received by the whole
world, and determined by Pontiffs : a thing not
without some appearance of temerity.

' It is absolutely certain, that the Supreme Pontiff
cannot err in decreeing ex cathedrd either on faith or
morals; and that immediately on his canonical elec-
tion he is endowed by Christ with the privilege of
infallibility/ f

Macedo in like manner affirms : c In my opinion,

* 'Responsiofidecertaest, infallibile Romani Pontificis judicium
in rebus fidei determinandis esse. Ita ut quando e Cathedra
definit, sive quando ut Pontifex proponit Ecclesise quidpiam fide
credendum, nullo casu possit errare, sive cum Generali Concilio
defmiat, sive sine illo.' — Sylvius, De Fidei Controv. lib. iv. qusest.
2, art. 8.

•f * Nemo negare potest, quin hsec propositio, quod Pontifex ut
Pontifex contra fidem possit decernere, viam faciat ad iuobedien-
tiam, occasionemque prsebeat dubitandi de multis, quse jam toto
orbe recepta sunt, et a Pontifice judicata : quod non vacat specie
aliqua temeritatis. — Duvall. ap. Suar. p. 590.

' Absolute certum eat, summum Pontificem neque in fide neque
in moribua ex Cathedra decernendis errare posse, statimque a sua
Canonica electione infallibilitatis privilegio a Christo donari.' — •-
Duvallius, De Infallibilitate Rom. Pont, pars ii. quaest. 1, p. 751,
ap. Gonzalez.

whoever believes the authority of the pope defining
ex catJiedrd to be absolutely infallible, and does not
believe in what he defines, without doubt errs in
faith, and, should he obstinately persist in his error,
would be a heretic. And I confidently assert that
those who either deny the Roman Pontiff to have
succeeded to Peter in authority of faith and teaching,
or at least lay down that the supreme pastor of the
Church can err in judgment on faith, bring into the
Church what is pestilent and pernicious.'*

Toletus affirms : ' The Roman Pontiff, in his judg-
ment on faith and morals, that is, while he judicially
determines what is to be believed, or in morals what
is to be done, cannot err. This conclusion is not one
to be held (merely) as an opinion, but the opposite is
a manifest error in faith, and Cano rightly says he
does not doubt that, if it were proposed to a Council,
it would be condemned as heresy.' f

Gonzalez sums up the doctrine of theologians as

* * Censeo, qui absolute infallibilem esse Papas ex Cathedra de-
finientis auctoritatem, ac defmitis non credat, eum liaud dubie
errare in fide ; 'et si in errore obstinatus perse veret, hsereticum
fore. Et fidenter assero, pestem eos Ecclesiae, ac pernieiem
afferre, qui aut negant R^manum Pontificem Petro in fidei doc-
trinaaque auctoritate succedere, aut certe adstruunt, summum
EcclesiaB pastorem errare in fidei judicio posse/ — Macedo, Tessera
Romana, qusest. v. art. 1.

f £ Romanus Pontifex in judicio fidei et morum, id est, dum de-
terminat judicialiter credenda, aut per mores facienda, non potest
errare. Non est ista conclusio opinative tenenda, sed opposita
est error manifestus in fide : et dicit Cano bene, se non dubitare,
si Concilio proponeretur, quod damnaretur ut hseresis.' — Toletus,
in Sec. Secund. S. Thorn, quasst. 1, art. 10, contr. 8, concl. 15.

follows: 'Therefore the infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff, although it is not expressly defined by the
Church, is yet proximately definable ; because it is a
theological truth, altogether certain, contained in the
scriptures, and confirmed by the perpetual tradition
of the Church, and the common consent of the fathers
and doctors : and, as Bellarmin said, the opposite doc-
trine u appears altogether erroneous, and proximate
to heresy, so that it might well be declared heretical
by the judgment of the Church." And though it be
not de fide, as to the obligation of believing it, im-
posed on all by the Church, yet it is de fide as to its
object] and also as to its obligation with regard to
those who are certain, on grounds which form their
conviction, that this truth is revealed : and this cer-
tainty almost all Catholic doctors have, except some
few in France. But in a thing of so much weight, a]l
are bound to examine the grounds on which rests the
proof that the Roman Pontiff defining ex cathedrd
cannot err : for whosoever denies to the Roman
Pontiff the privilege of infallibility granted to him by
Christ, whether from not having diligently examined
the controversy, or because he is carried away by
some human motive, and so errs in forming his
judgment, would not be held guiltless before God;
inasmuch as his error would be culpable, and his
ignorance vincible.' *

* ' Itaque infallibility Roraani Pontificis, licet non sit expresse
definita ab Ecclesia, est tamen proxime definibilie, quia est veritas

If it be said that this has not been defined and pro-
posed by the Church as de fide, it may be answered
first, that many truths of Divine revelation have not
been defined. All that is defined is indeed defide, but
not all that is de fide has been defined. The revela-
tion of Christianity extends far beyond the definitions
which, in condemnation of error, the Church has
made progressively from age to age. The infallibility
of the successor of Peter, speaking ex catliedrct, as
universal teacher, was not contradicted till the pre-
ludes of the so-called Reformation began to work.
And wheresoever the contradiction has gained a
hold, a decline of faith has followed. The events
of the last century in France issued naturally from

theologica, omnino certa, contenta in Scripturis, et perpetua
Ecclesias traditions et coramuni consensu Patrum ac Doctorum
firmata; et, ut ajebat Bellarminus, opposita doctrina videtur om-
nino erronea, et hceresi proximo,, ut meritd possit judicio Ecclesice
hceretica declarari. Et licet non sit de fide, quoad obligationem
credendi intimatam omnibus ab Ecclesia, est tamen de fide quoad
objectum, et quoad obligationem respectu eorum qui certi sunt
bane veritatem esse revelatam, ob argumenta quibus convincun-
tur : hanc autem certitudinem habent omnes fere Doctores Catho-
lici, exceptis paucis nonnullis ex Gallia. Omnes autem in re
tanti momenti tenentur fnndamenta expendere, quibus probatur
Romanum Pontificem definientem e Cathedra non posse errare ;
nam si quis negaret Romano Pontifici privilegium infallibilitatis
ipsi a Christo concessum, vel quia controversiam hanc diligenter
non examinavit ; vel quia aliqua passione humana abreptus
erravit in judicio ferendo, is apud Deum excusationem non ha-
beret ; quia ejus error esset culpabilis, et ejus ignorantia vinci-
bilis.'— Gonzalez, ut supra, disp. xvii. sect ii. 11.

See also Raynaudi, Corona Aurea, ' Romanus Pontifex docens
ex Cathedra errare non potest.' — App. torn. x. p. 146.

the Declaration of 1682. The incoherence of ad-
mitting a Supremacy and denying its infallible
action encouraged and provoked the spirit of scep-
ticism and mockery in the bad, and of doubt and
hesitation in the good, which prepared for the En-
cyclopedia and the Voltairian unbelief. Gallican-
ism was a political aberration, and France has dearly
expiated it. With this before our eyes, it is our
duty towards the faith, towards the Divine order
of the Church, towards the flocks committed to us,
and towards our country for which we labour
and pray, to testify to the whole revelation of truth,
and to the whole Divine economy ordained for its
perpetuity and its preservation in purity and integ-
rity. It is not then needless, or gratuitous, still
less is it polemical and hostile, to declare in the
fullest and most explicit way the truths which are
embodied in this great Centenary. They may be
summed up in the words of S. Leo : c The solidity of
that faith which was commended in the Prince of the
Apostles is perpetual ; and as that which Peter be-
lieved in Christ abides for ever, so does that for ever
abide which Christ instituted in Peter. .... The
order of truth, therefore, is abiding, and Blessed
Peter, persevering in the firmness which he had
received as of a Rock, has not forsaken the helm of
the Church.'* Or in the words of S. Peter Chryso-
logus, c Blessed Peter, who lives and presides in his

* S. Leon. Opp. Serm. ii. in Die Assumptionis suae, torn. i.
pp. 51-52, Ed. Lugd. 1700.

E 2

own See, holds out to all who seek it the true faith.' *
Or in those of one who, with a profusion of learning
and irresistible evidence, has destroyed for ever the
Acts of 1682: 'This tradition of the Fathers does
not only derive from Peter to his successor a gene-
ral primacy, but also a firmness which never fails
in propounding the dogmas of faith from Peter's
Chair; nay, it exhibits Peter himself, that is, the
immoveable Rock of Faith, the pillar and foundation,
as still living and teaching in his Chair and See ; it
regards the Roman Pontiffs as one person with Peter;
and it describes them with the same honours, and
invests them with the same titles, as Peter himself, f '

I will now go on to the second reason which sug-
gested what has hitherto been said.

Subordinate in importance to the Primacy and
Chair of Peter, but far beyond that of the celebration
of the Centenary, is the other subject announced by
the Holy Father in the Allocution of June 26 ;
namely, the intention to convene a General Council.
The words which fell from his lips will be long re-
membered, and the intense response of heart and
mind with which they were heard.

The Holy Father spoke as follows : — 4 Nothing is
more desired by us, venerable brethren, than that we
should gather from this your union with the Apostolic
See the fruit which we hold to be the most salutary

* S. Petri Chrvs. Ep. ad Eutychen apud S. Leon. M. Opp.
torn. i. pp. 241-2, Ed, Lugd. 1700.

•f Orsi de Rom. Pontif. Auctor. torn. ii. 338.

and auspicious. We have, indeed, long pondered in
our mind, as was known to many of our venerable
brethren, as occasion needed, a purpose which, so soon
as the opportunity we desire shall come, we trust to
be able to effect, namely, that we may hold a Sacred
(Ecumenical and General Council of the bishops of
the whole world, in which, after united counsels and
labours together, the necessary and healing remedies,
by God's help, may be applied to the many evils which
the Church is suffering. From this, as we greatly
hope, it will come to pass that the light of Catholic
truth may diffuse its saving illumination in the dark-
ness by which the minds of men are enveloped, so that
they may see and press onwards, by the grace of God,
in the true path of salvation and of justice. From
this, also, it will come to pass that the Church, like
a conquering army set in array, may repel the hostile
assaults of adversaries, break their power, and
triumphing over them, propagate and spread more
widely the kingdom of Jesus Christ on earth.'

We have here, in his own words, the reasons of this
greatest act of Pontifical government over the Church ;
namely, the union of counsels and labours to find and
apply remedies to the evils of our time ; to manifest
more luminously to those who are in darkness the
light of truth; to consolidate and concentrate more
and more closely the force and power of the Church,
for the twofold work of breaking the power of its ad-
versaries, and of spreading far and wide the kingdom
of Jesus Christ upon earth.

Hitherto, in what I have said, we have been con-
templating the perpetual supremacy of Peter, both in
truth and jurisdiction, throughout the Church diffused
in all the world. Now, we have to contemplate a higher
and more sovereign exercise of his prerogatives in the
Church congregated in Council.

It belongs to the successors of Peter alone to con-
voke, to direct, to prorogue, to translate, to confirm,
and to dissolve the (Ecumenical Councils of the Church.
The highest prerogatives of the Pontificate are partly
dormant while the Church is diffused, but are fully
exercised when the Church is congregated. More
than this; the prerogative of Peter as the confirmer
of his brethren is never so explicitly manifest as in
the direction and confirmation of Councils. Every
Council of the Church, from Nice to Trent, has
reflected more visibly and vividly the supremacy
and infallibility of the Chair of Peter. The Council
of Constance, with an exceptional and explicit
act, recognises and declares the same Divine order.
Supreme while as yet the See of Peter was vacant,
or was claimed by competitors of doubtful election,
it submitted at once when the person of the
Apostle was visible upon his Chair. It would be too
long to draw out in full the historical proofs of the
fact, that in no part of his action upon the Church
has the successor of Peter more supremely exercised
his singular prerogatives than in the series of the
(Ecumenical Councils. For such as doubt this asser-
tion I may give reference to proofs, which will be

found more than enough. The three following works
will suffice. Let any candid man examine i Turrecre-
mata de Conciliis,' ' Orsi de Eomani Pontificis Aucto-
ritate,' ' Brancatus de LauraBa De Decretis Ecclesiae.'
All that can now be done is to sum up briefly a few
of the chief heads, and to mark the outline of the
subject.

Although General Councils, apart from the Pontiff,
have the assistance of the Holy Spirit, yet they are
not thereby necessarily infallible : but when directed
by their head in the definitions they make, or when
confirmed by him, they cannot err.*

The decrees of General Councils, made apart from
their head, or not confirmed by their head, even
though they be true, yet do not impose the obligation
of belief or obedience upon the Church. f

c A Council is not truly general, nor does it repre-
sent the Universal Church, if it be apart from its
head, or act without him, or without subordination
to him : for then it would be a headless body.
Therefore, it is by the influx of the head into
the body that the Council acts, and by the assist-
ance of the Holy Ghost it acts infallibly, so as to
bind all the faithful. Hence, S. Leo the Great says
of the Decree of the Council of Chalcedon against
Eutyches : " What things the Lord had defined be-
fore by our ministry, He confirmed by the irreversible

* Brancatus de Laursea, De Decretis Eccl., Disp. v. Art. ii.,
s. 82.

Ibid. s. 83.

assent of the whole brotherhood (i.e. episcopate)
that He might show that it (the dogma) truly pro-
ceeded from Himself, that what had been first con-
firmed by the first See of all, the judgment of the
whole Christian world received ; that in this also the
members should be in accordance with the head."
Therefore, in the judgment of S. Leo, by the influx of
the head of the Church, that is, of the Pope, into the
Council, it decides infallibly, so as to oblige (the
faithful) ; and the confirming of the judgment of
Councils is proof that they have not erred, but have
spoken by the dictate of the Holy Ghost.'* 'This
uninterrupted practice (of asking confirmation) signi-
fies that the whole Church well knows that from the
head the influx (of infallible truth) descends into the
members. And thus it is, that if .the decrees of faith
made in Councils are infallible, so as to oblige the
faithful to belief, they should know that it comes
principally from the head, infallibly attesting that
the Councils have been directed by the Holy Spirit.' f

In proof and exemplification of this influx of the
infallible direction of the head in General Councils,
Brancatus de Laursea gives the following :

The Council of Nice was presided over by the
Roman legates, and confirmed by S. Sylvester. J

The Council of Constantinople was guided in its

* Brancatus de Laurzea, De Decretis Eccl., Disp. v. Art. ii.
105,

f Ibid. Art. ii. s. 103.

J Muzzarellij De Auctor. Rom. Pontif. torn. i. p. 91.

condemnation of the Macedonian heresy by the
decree of Pope Damasus, who had already condemned
it in a Synod at Rome. The Council was in part con-
firmed, so far as the condemnation of the Macedonian
heresy and the declaration of the Nicene faith ; but
Pope Damasus rejected its canons.

The Council of Ephesus was directed by the letters
of Pope Ccelestine to condemn Nestorius, whom he
had already condemned in a Council at Rome;

The Council of Chalcedon was directed by S. Leo
to condemn Eutyches, whom he had already con-
demned. The Fathers of the Council would define
nothing until they had heard the Tome, or dogmatic
letter of the Pontiff. They then answered in words
which since then have become a sacred tradition and
a theological principle : ' Peter has spoken by Leo.'

The Second Council of Constantinople would make
no decree respecting the Three Chapters till Pope
Vigilius had condemned them.

The Third Council of Constantinople, by direction
of Pope Agatho, who in a Council at Rome had
already condemned the Monothelite heresy, again con-
demned it. Pope Agatho wrote to the Council, ex-
horting them to liberate the Church from error, and
to declare the true faith, ' which was founded upon
the firm rock, that is, of this Church of blessed Peter,
Prince of the Apostles, which by his favour and pro-
tection remains pure from all error/ To this the
Fathers answered, as at Chalcedon, 4 Receiving
the suggestions directed ... by the most holy and

blessed Agatho, Pope of the ancient Rome ; and
another suggestion made by the Council, subject to
him, and following closely the things contained in it,
we so judge, profess, and believe,7 &c. Domitius,
Bishop of Prusa, declared that the 'suggestions of
our Father Agatho were to be received as dictated by
the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of the holy and
blessed Prince of the Apostles, Peter/ * Finally, the
emperor, writing to a synod of Western bishops,
declares that all the Fathers of the Council were of
one faith both in mind and in speech, and venerated
the letter of Agatho c as the voice of the Divine Peter
himself.' f

Such is the evidence of the first six General Coun-
cils, before what is called the division of the East
and West. It is not necessary, and it is not now
possible, to descend lower in the series; but all ac-
knowledge that in proportion as we advance, the evi-
dence of the prerogatives of the Roman Pontiffs is
more explicitly and undeniably found. J It is to be here

* Orsi De Rom. Pontif. Auct. torn. i. P. i. p. 410, 412.

f Ibid. p. 413.

J The three following Councils may be given as examples.

'Ipsa quoque Sancta Romana Ecclesia Summum Principatum
super universam Ecclesiam obtinet, quern se ab ipso Domino in
Beato Petr j, cujus Romanus Pontifex est successor, cum potes-
tatis plenitudine recepisae recognoscit ; sic, si quae de Fide
subortse fuerint qusestiones, suo debent judicio definiri.' — Ccncil.
Lugd. (Ecum. II.

' Definimus, Romanum Pontificem in universum Orbem habere
Primatum, et successorem esse Petri, totiusque Ecclesise Caput,
et Christianorum Patrem ac Doctorem existere : et ipsi in Beato

observed, that the ruling idea present to the Councils
was the See of Peter and the Faith of Peter : that
the Councils did not claim to themselves infallibility,
in virtue either of the promise ' Where two or three
are gathered together, there am I in the midst of
them,' nor 4 Behold, I am with you all days.7 The
Divine promise always before them was, c I have
prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not.' It was the
presence and faith of Peter, both of them indefectible,
by Divine assistance, in the person of his successor, to
which they turned as the source of direction in their
deliberations and the seal of confirmation to their
decrees. It is to be observed, also, that before the
Councils of Constantinople I., Ephesus, Chalcedon,
and Constantinople III. met, the Roman Pontiffs had
already condemned the heresies in question. Their
subsequent condemnations added publicity, notoriety,
promulgation, not certainty or validity, to the pre-
vious condemnations of the Pontiffs. But those
previous Pontifical acts gave infallible direction to
their decrees, and made them of obligation to all the
Churches.

The whole doctrine and practice here expressed
was summed up in the Council of Trent. It recog-
nised more amply than any other Council of the

Petro regendi Ecclesiam a D. N. Jesu Christo plenam potestatem
traditam esse, quemadmodum etiara in gestis GEcumenicorum
Conciliorum, et in Sacris Canonibus continetur.' — Condi. Flor.
Sess. ult.

* Dubia Fidei declarare, ad Sedem duntaxat Apostolicam per-
tinet.' — Condi. Vienn. XV. Generate, sub Clem. V.

Church, even than those over which the Sovereign
Pontiffs in person had presided, the supreme legis-
lative and executive authority of the Vicar of Jesus
Christ. It was directed in all its sessions by his
guidance. It was closed and confirmed by him. The
execution of its decrees rested in his hands. The
reigning Pontiff, Pius IV., by three supreme Pontifi-
cal acts, provided : First, that all ecclesiastical pre-
scriptions and customs contrariant to its decrees
should be null and void. Secondly, that no prescrip-
tion or custom thenceforward should ever acquire
force against the Council of Trent. Thirdly, that no
one, under pain of excommunication, should interpret
its decrees; reserving all interpretation to himself
and his successors.*

The supreme authority of the successor of Peter
over the Church can hardly be more visibly proved
than by the fact that of the Councils claiming to be
General, eighteen are approved as such, eight are
condemned and annulled, six are partly approved
and partly annulled ; and this by the sole authority
of the Roman Pontiff.f

With these principles before us, we shall be better
able to appreciate the facts of this time, and to dispose
of certain popular misunderstandings, which have been
laid down with great confidence, and with claims to
superior knowledge. We are told that the holding of
a General Council was not the spontaneous intention

* Sermons 011 Ecclesiastical Subjects, p. 157.
f Bellarmin, de Conciliis, lib. i. c. vi. vii.

of the Pope, but was forced upon him ; and that if he is
willing to convene it, he is the only person in Rome
that is so ; that Rome hates Councils, and that Councils
are fatal to Rome; that the future General Council is
a reaction against excessive pretensions, and will
impose limits on them; that it will confirm the past
acts of Popes on Gallican principles, and review or
modify the Encyclical and Syllabus of 1864.

For the first three hundred years no General
Council ever met: for the last three hundred no
General Council has been convened. In the eighteen
centuries of the Church only eighteen General
Councils have been held. It is clear, therefore, as
Bellarmin teaches, that though General Councils are
useful, and sometimes necessary for particular times,
they are not necessary to the office of the Church.
The Church is not infallible in virtue of General
Councils, but General Councils are infallible in virtue
of the infallibility of the Church. The whole Church,
both the Ecclesia Docens and the Ecclesia Discens,
diffused throughout the world, is infallible at all
times. r\ he Church discharges its office as witness,
judge, and teacher always, and in all places. The
See of Peter and the episcopate diffused throughout
fche world are so assisted by the perpetual presence of
the Spirit of truth that they can never err as witness,
judge, or teacher. In the three hundred years before
the Council of Nice, the infallible voice of the Church
Sufficed for the promulgation and diffusion of the
faith ; in the intervals between Council and Council

the Church was perpetually infallible in its declara-
tions of truth, and in its condemnations of error.
In the three hundred years since the Council of
Trent, the Church has taught with the same infal-
libility. The line of Pontiffs, from Pius IV.
who confirmed the Council of Trent, to Pius IX.
who defined the Immaculate Conception, have,
taught with the same supreme and infallible voice.
Witness, as a few out of many, the condem-
nations of Baius, Jansenius, Molinos; the Bull
Unigenitus; the condemnation of the Synod of
Pistoia and, more recently, of Lamennais, Hermes,
Frohschammer, and of the errors enumerated in the
Syllabus. To the declaration of these truths.y and to
the condemnation of these errors, no act of the
Church in Council is required. They are already full
and perfect by the plenitude of the Pontifical au-
thority. Peter has spoken by Innocent, by Alexander,
by Clement, and by Pius. If, at any time, in an
(Ecumenical Council, any dogma be defined which has
been already defined by the Pope, or by other
General Councils, the bishops act as judges, but are
already bound to judge in conformity to what is al-
ready defined. But if the defining of anything not
yet defined is in question, they are the judges in such
sense that their judgments have no force to bind the
conscience until the assent and confirmation of the
Supreme Pontiff has been given. It was thus that
the fathers at Chalcedon declared that Peter spoke by
Leo ; and the Fathers of Constantinople recognised his

voice in the letter of Pope Agatho. In this they ac-
knowledged that which Leo and Agatho had already
promulgated, by their prerogative of supreme and uni-
versal teachers, to be the Catholic Faith. It was thus
also that the Fathers of Trent denned the doctrine of
original sin; which, till then, had rested upon the in-
fallible declarations of S. Innocent I. It was thus they
declared the Canon of the sacred books, which till
then had rested upon the authority of S. Gelasius;
and also condemned the errors of the so-called Re-
formers, already condemned by Leo the Tenth.

The future General Council, then, whensoever it be
convened, will not turn back upon any of the acts of
the Church or of its head ; which already, in virtue of
the Divine assistance, are, as it is called, irreformable
and infallible. Its office will be of another kind,
bearing upon the present and the future relations of
the Church to the world.

If it be asked, then, what need is there of a General
Council? it may be answered at once that the state of
the whole Christian society of the world is such that
no other remedy is proportioned to its need.

For three hundred years, perpetual changes have
been working ; a series of revolutions has swept away
the old usages of the Christian world; an accumu-
lation of errors and of evils, intellectual and moral,
has gathered in every country.

Bellarmin enumerates six causes for which General
Councils are usefully convened. The last is exactly
in point: — 'The sixth cause is the general reformation

of abuses arid vices which creep into the Church ; for
although the Pontiff can of himself make laws for
the whole Church, nevertheless these things are far
more acceptably carried through when the Supreme
Pontiff makes such laws with the assent of a General
Council.' *

Even in the natural order, the benefits are obvious.
More is seen by many eyes ; and the conflict of many
opinions, when men are scattered, is allayed by their
coming together in counsel. Councils have a special
efficacy against heresies and schisms ; above all, when
the authority of the Pontiff is the point chiefly
denied, as in the Greek and the Protestant separa-
tions. The decisions of such Councils, if they do
not satisfy the authors of heresy and of schism,
nevertheless confirm both truth and unity, and set a
mark upon their opposites which wither their growth
and ensure their fall.

Every General Council has been convened to meet
some special heresy or evil of the day. The first six
were convened to condemn heresies, the seventh to
condemn the Iconoclasts, the eighth for the cause of
Photius, the ninth for the recovery of the Holy Land,
the tenth against the claims of anti-popes, the eleventh
against the Waldenses, the twelfth against heresies
and for the Holy Land, the thirteenth against the
usurpation of the Emperor Frederick II., the four-
teenth against the errors of the Greeks, the fifteenth
against various heresies, the sixteenth for the reunion

* Bellarm. de Conciliis, lib. i. c. ix.

of the East, the seventeenth for the healing of schisms
and for questions of public law, the eighteenth against
the great Lutheran heresy, and for the correction of
moral evils.

The mediaeval Councils had to deal not so much
with heresies as with mixed matters of secular
power and abuse ; and that because, from the time of
S. Gregory the Great, a Christian world, with all its
complex relations to the unity of the faith and the
Church, had been growing and ripening to maturity.
The contest for investitures and immunities belongs to
a later period of the work and warfare of the Church.
Every age, therefore, has its needs and dangers; and
these constitute the reasons for new laws, and, if so
judged expedient, for a Council. What, then, are the
causes requiring a General Council at this time ?

The first and most obvious cause for the convening
of a General Council is the internal state of the Church
itself. Of the last General Council, the greater part
had relation to the discipline and administration of the
Church in the states and kingdoms of the Catholic
world. Of the twenty-five Sessions of Trent, many are
headed ' De Reformatione ;' that is, for the correction of
evils, usurpations, and abuses, and for the readjust-
ment of the practices and institutions of the various
Catholic countries to the immutable laws and prin-
ciples of the Catholic Church. In the discipline of
the Church there are, therefore, two elements : one
which is fixed and changeless, namely, the Divine
law, both moral and positive, of which the Church is

the witness and the guardian; the other is variable
and accidental, depending upon the conditions of
society and of nations. Of the former, the Holy Sacra-
ments, and all that attaches to their administration
in form and matter, may be taken as example ; of the
latter, the laws of benefice and patronage, the forms
of tribunals and of procedure. It is obvious that in
this latter kind, the last three hundred years have
rendered necessary an extensive revision of the Ca-
tholic discipline. Benefices, patronage, and tribunals
have been swept away in almost every country. The
Church has to reorganise itself upon its changeless
principles, but in contact with new conditions of
society.

Another cause requiring the deliberation of the
Church, is the change of its relations, both those of
the Holy See, and of the several churches of its com-
munion, to the civil powers of every country. Since
the Council of Trent, the revolutions in France,
Austria, and Italy have separated the civil powers
from the unity of the Church. The nations re-
main Catholic as before, but many public laws are at
variance with the laws of the Church. The old
forms of usage and of arrangement need revision,
in order to bring into peaceful co-operation the
two supreme authorities on which the welfare of
society reposes. If the governments of the world
know their own highest interests, they will recognise
the necessity of entering into loyal and honourable
relations of confidence and co-operation with a power

which pervades, sometimes a large proportion, some-
times the whole population, subject to their civil rule.
The Church pervades at least one-fourth, if not a
third, of the population of Great Britain and its colo-
nies ; about a fifth of the United States ; nearly a half
of the Prussian monarchy; and almost the entire
population of other great kingdoms ; and the influence
of religion is that which most deeply affects the loyalty
and fidelity of nations. It is of the highest moment
to the civil powers of the world to readjust their rela-
tions with the Catholic Church; for so long as the
public laws are at variance with its divine rights and
liberties, internal peace and fidelity are hardly to be
secured. Poland and Ireland are proofs beyond
question.

Again, the Church has at all times endeavoured to
sustain the Christian society of nations from the
downward tendency which is always carrying it to-
wards the mere natural order. Human society is the
creation of God in the order of nature. But Christian
society is the creation of God in the order of grace.
Political society, in its natural state, rests upon
humanity and the moral law known by the light of
nature. Christendom rests upon the Incarnation ;
and was created by the faith, sacraments, unity, and
authority of the Church. The confederation or family
of nations is natural society elevated to the order of
grace, and governed by laws which flow from both
natural and supernatural fountains. The union of
these two laws and jurisdictions, and the supreme

r 2

direction of the supernatural over the natural law, con-
stitutes the Christian order of the world, as expressed
in the old formulas of the concord of the Church and
the empire, or of the Church and the civil powers.
Such is and always will be the Christian and Catholic
jurisprudence. If it cease to live in the kingdoms of
the world, their public laws and actions, it will always
remain indelible in the theology and principles of the
Catholic Church. The theory of the separation of
Church and State, and the independence of the two,
and of free Churches in free states, if enunciated as an
absolute truth, is an error at variance with the mission
of the Church to mankind. If it be affirmed only as
a statement of the tendency of the world, and of the
events before our eyes, it is an undoubted fact. The
civil powers everywhere for these three hundred
years have striven, first, to establish a superiority
of the civil over the spiritual, as in France and
Austria, and failing this, to separate themselves and
to claim an independence of all spiritual authority.
The effect of this is to reduce the Christian society
of the world to the natural order ; to divest the
State of all religious character ; to make it external
to the faith, and to the Church ; or, in a word, to
desecrate that which the providence of God through
the action of His Church had consecrated. I will
not stop here to point out the application of all
this to the temporal power of the Sovereign Pontiff ;
nor to show how large and luminous an interpretation
it affords of the inflexibility with which he has for

twenty years refused all cession and compromise of
this Christian order, of which the Holy See is the
source and guardian. It is inevitable that a General
Council, in which the relations of the Church in
all lands to the civil powers throughout the world
must be calmly revised by men of the maturest
wisdom and calmest temper, under the heaviest
private and public responsibility, cannot fail to dis-
perse the clouds of empty declamation which have
obscured the truth. Men are coming to perceive
that the Christian society of the world is menaced ;
and that its preservation depends upon a firm and
fearless maintenance of the great laws and principles
of Christianity, as the providence of God has ordained
them.

So much of the causes internal to the Church.

But there are to be found other reasons of great
interest to every one who is animated by a love of
souls and of the truth and honour of our Divine
Lord, in the state of Christian nations separated from
the unity of the Catholic Church. It is impossible to
look at the East without a profound sorrow for the
desolate Churches of Persia, Armenia, Palestine,
Egypt, Asia Minor, and of Greece. The memories
of saints and doctors hang like a light over their
spiritual children now in the darkness of schism and
heresy. The old sanctuaries, desecrated and forsaken,
still stand, awaiting the day of their reconciliation. The
Mahometan power is wasting away. There was a
time when all the Christian powers of Europe could

not expel it from the Holy Land. Now, it could not
maintain itself an hour, if the jealousies of Christians
did not secure its dominion over the Christian in-
heritance. The time of its fall, or of its migration,
cannot be far off. But as it is now, there might
be no bar to the return of the East to the unity of
Jesus Christ. It is but just to acknowledge that the
Porte has manifested of late to its Christian subjects a
singular toleration and equity. What the Council of
Florence failed to do, another Council, by the help of
the Spirit of God, may accomplish. There is a bond
between the East and the Holy See which has never
been broken ; the love and worship of the Imma-
culate Mother of God; and by this bond, Pius IX.
has drawn more closely than any other Pontiff the
Churches of the East to the See of Peter. The defi-
nition of the Immaculate Conception has been recog-
nised by Orientals to be no more than their constant
and universal belief. The indiction of the Council,
in whatsoever year it be, will be fixed for the 8th
of December, a day of augury and power. The
patriarchs and bishops of the East who surrounded
Pius IX. the other day, brought to my mind the first-
fruits of the nations who came up to Bethlehem.
There were some who had travelled forty days — one
who had travelled longer still — before he could
reach an ordinary road. When I saw them surround
the Vicar of our Lord and kiss his feet, almost by
force, I prayed God that the day might be hastened
when the sun shall arise upon Asia restored to the
unity of the only fold.

And, lastly, there are thoughts nearer home, and
more intimate to our hearts. The great separation
of the West cannot continue for ever. If the General
Council call on the East to return to the peace of Jesus
Christ, the West will not be forgotten. And the
voice which calls will not call in vain. There is a
movement of the Spirit of, God in the hearts of those
who, in Germany and England, for the last three
hundred years have been separated from the centre of
Christendom. Men are weary of uncertainties, con-
tentions, disappointments. They are beginning to be
convinced in intellect of the wrongs which have been
done in ages past to the unity of the faith and to the
authority of the Church ; they are disturbed in con-
science at the evident incoherence of the state they
have inherited with the great laws of Divine revela-
tion. There is a desire to heal the wounds of the
past, to be reconciled with the great family of
Christendom, to receive once more the benediction of
the first pastor of the Christian Church, to worship
again in the midst of the world-wide sanctuaries and
solemnities of the Word made flesh. All these things
may be mingled with emotion and imagination, with
unreality and a superficial piety. But even so they are
in the main, in their origin, and in their end, right and
good. If, however, this be true of some, very certainly
of a large number we may believe with joy and
thankfulness that their desires and aspirations are
heartfelt and real, and spring from the inspirations of
grace. A General Council has been the desire and

dream of multitudes of the highest and noblest minds,
out of the Catholic Church, in England in these last
three hundred years. I hardly dare to speak with
the precision of truth, lest I should seem to be
severe and unkindly. But the suppression of truth
is not charity ; and silence in such times as these is
suppression. . The General Council which will be held
hereafter, if God so permit, will be convened by the
Roman Pontiff ; and will be composed of those who
believe, as an article of Divine faith, the visible unity
and infallibility of the Catholic and Roman Church.
Its first act will be to reaffirm, in all its amplitude,
the Holy Catholic Faith as defined and declared by
the sacred canons of the Council of Trent.

4 The Council of Trent was a Council of recapitula-
tion. It was the heir of all the definitions of the
Church. The heresies of old assailed here and there
a doctrine of the faith : but God had permitted now
a heresy to assail, in a whole line of errors, not only
the whole line of the faith, but also the Divine
authority of the Church itself. The Council of
Trent, therefore, summed up in its decrees what other
Councils had declared. All their voices spoke by its
one voice, as, on the day of Pentecost, all the Apostles
spoke by Peter. The Councils of Africa again pro-
mulgated their decrees of original sin; the Council
of Orange, of preventing grace; the Council of
Vienne, of the infusion of spiritual habits in regenera-
tion ; the Council of Toledo, of the Procession of the
Holy Ghost; the Council of Lateran, of the mystery

of transubstantiation ; the Council of Florence, which
was itself the summary of the Councils of the East,
spoke in all their names ; all these received their ex-
pression in the decrees of Trent. . . . The profes-
sion of faith promulgated by Pius IV. recapitu-
lates the doctrine of the whole Church, East and
West, in one, and presents it to the world in ample
array, bright and resplendent, over against the prolific
errors of these later days — restless with a perverse
intellectual activity — and fronts its advance, reaching
from wing to wing.' *

We gladly recognise whatever zeal for doctrinal
truth is to be found among Protestants of every
denomination; among Anglicans, for many Catholic
truths, and for approximations to Catholic doctrine ;
among Protestant Dissenters, for those primary and
personal truths relating to our Divine Lord and His
redemption, and to the soul and its union with Him.
All these truths, in the main, and apart from im-
perfections of conception and statement, are Christian
and Catholic ; portions of our inheritance of faith, and
of the deposit committed to the Church. The
Reformation, which shattered so much of the order
of Christian truth, preserved all these. But the
tendencies called into activity by the Reformation have
been continually destroying the belief of these truths
in every Protestant country. Nevertheless, there re-
mains in Germany, England, and Scotland a strong

* Sermons on Ecclesiastical Subjects, pp. 153-4.

traditional belief in many great Christian verities;
which, though undermined and menaced, are still
held and revered piously by multitudes. Such per-
sons are becoming daily sensible that so far, at least,
a common belief unites them to us ; and that we op-
pose to the infidelity which threatens them, a firm and
unyielding front. All such minds cannot fail to see
in a General Council a powerful witness in support
of Christianity. They will know that we are strengthen-
ing and confirming the truths which they retain. They
will feel to have a share in what is passing, and a
sympathy in our acts. It is certain, also, that upon
a multitude of minds who are wavering and doubt-
ful, seeking for a foundation on which to rest, and an
authority to which to listen, the voice of a General
Council will have great power. The condition of
Germany, England, and Scotland is in marked con-
trast to their state three hundred years ago. Pro-
testantism has varied, changed, put off its original
type, and unfolded itself into a multitude of irrecon-
cilable forms. It has been always in flux, and is
now evidently in rapid dissolution. In such a moment
the immutability of the faith manifests itself; and the
intellectual and moral action of the Church in Council
cannot fail to penetrate both the intellects and the
wills of men. The Council of Trent fixed the epoch
after which Protestantism never spread. The next
General Council will probably date the period of its
dissolution. It is certain that the influence of the
Church so assembled to deliberate and to legislate for

the needs and perturbations of the Christian world will
have a powerful effect to convince and to persuade,
to mitigate and to subdue. If the proclaiming of an
amnesty dissolves the organisation of political sedition
by appealing to the hearts of men, how much more
must the call of the Church of Jesus Christ to peace
and charity attract the elements of faith and piety
which are scattered among the divisions of Christen-
dom ? It is a heavenly invitation to 'men of good
will/ and by some it will be surely heard. Call it
superstition or dreaming, as men may, I am confident
that the spectacle of the Church deliberating in
Council on the wounds and miseries of the Christian
world, will sink into their hearts. A virtue will go
out of it, and a manifold influence will spread from
it which will powerfully affect the intellect, the con-
science, the will, the whole spiritual nature. The sun
and the shower ripen the fruits of the earth, whether
we will or no. The seed of the kingdom springs even
among the tares, while men sleep. The action of the
Church upon the world is beyond the power of man
to exclude or to control. He may shut his eyes, but
he cannot cover the sun. He may turn his back to
the light, but he cannot darken the earth. Moreover,
there is another power which will work with us.
4 Spiritus Domini replevit orbem terrarum.' The
Spirit of God is working internally in all men. And
when the Church speaks to their ear, the Spirit moves
their hearts to answer. There will be lights in the
reason, promptings in the conscience, aspirations in

the heart, movements in the will, which flow from
the Spirit of Truth and Grace upon all to whom the
presence and the voice of the Church in Council
reaches; and of these, some will refuse, many will
obey. It is a time of visitation, in which, by a special
intervention, God calls to the nations. It is a pro-
vidential renewal of the declaration, God 'will have
all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of
the truth ; ' * and of the invitation, ' The Spirit and
the Bride say, come: and he that heareth, let him
say, come. And he that thirsteth, let him come ; and
he that will, let him take the water of life freely.' f

I do not pretend, Reverend and dear Brethren, to
know the motives which have determined the Holy
Father to convene a General Council, further than his
Allocution has expressed them ; but those I have
touched on are some which we may ourselves easily
conceive. We may also anticipate many other reasons
for thankfulness and hope as to the consequences of
such an event.

(1.) And, first, it is evident that the conscious
unity, universality, and power of the Church must
be indefinitely elicited and strengthened by meeting
in Council. As has been already said, no Pontificate
for three hundred years has so brought the Church
together as that of Pius IX. Three times the bishops
have met, have become known to the Sovereign Pontiff
and to each other, and have been united in solemn

* 1 Tim. ii. 4. f Apoc. xxii. 17.

public acts, and in the unanimous declaration of great
Catholic principles. A consciousness of absolute
unanimity and mutual support pervades the episco-
pate of all nations at this time more intensely than,
perhaps, at any period in past history. The Church
has acted and spoken three times in these last
years ; and the unity of mind and spirit which, by the
grace of Divine faith, pervades it, has been extended
even to matters which, though not of faith, are in
contact with faith. It may be affirmed, therefore,
that there never was a moment when the episcopate
was so compact, so prepared for action, and so closely
united to its head. Of this it is thoroughly con-
scious, and this consciousness gives a vast force to all
its acts. Firm and inflexible as the Sovereign Pontiff
has ever been, he has not hesitated to declare that the
unanimous support of the bishops has added to him a
greater courage and strength. The bishops of Italy, in
these last ten years, have exhibited a fortitude and a
fidelity, in the midst of every kind of danger, which
sets a luminous example to the world. The presence
and sympathy of their colleagues from all parts of the
earth cannot fail to sustain them. The great Churches
of France and Spain, and the younger Churches of
England and America, still more the Missionary
Churches in the ends of the earth, all both give and
receive an impulse of conscious power from their con-
tact with each other and with Rome. It is impos-
sible that this should not react powerfully upon the
whole Church throughout the world. All who have

been assembled at the centre of authority will carry
back with them a consciousness of power which will
spread through the whole Catholic unity ; and this
consciousness of unity is strength. It is the one thing
which the world cannot give, nor imitate. God alone
is its Author; and it makes His Church fearless and
invincible.

(2.) And this must powerfully vindicate the
liberty of the Church in all its spiritual action. Since
the year 1862, and especially since the Allocution of
September 1865, men have come more clearly to under-
stand that the question of the temporal power is not one
of a few provinces and towns, much less of a royal title
or of a royal revenue. It is the condition by which Divine
Providence has secured the liberty of the person and
of the office of the Vicar of Christ, and of his supreme
and independent direction of all civil powers in matters
which fall within the Divine law. In proportion
as the Church is conscious of its unity, it will make
itself felt on the public opinion of every country.
So long as the Church is kept apart by the jealousies
of governments and nations, it remains unconscious
of the vast strength which arises from the unity of
co-operation. Despots hate popes, and love patriarchs ;
for popes are sovereigns, and inflexible; patriarchs
may become courtiers, and dependents. In this is
seen the difference between the highest power which
is only of ecclesiastical creation, and the Vicar of Jesus
Christ. The 'Non possumus' of S. Peter is absolute.
Frederick the Great of Prussia, with the keen in-

stinct of an infidel, recommended the erection of na-
tional churches as the true solvent of Catholic unity;
and of patriarchates as a guarantee of subserviency
to the royal will, and a barrier to exclude the Pon-
tifical supremacy. Civil governments, so long as
their Catholic subjects can be dealt with in detail,
are strong, and often oppressive. When they have to
deal with the Church throughout the world, the
minority becomes a majority, and subjects, in all
matters spiritual, become free. We are approaching
a time when civil governments must deal with the
Church as a whole, and with its head as supreme ;
and a General Council, which makes itself felt in every
civilised nation, will powerfully awaken civil rulers to
the consciousness that the Church is not a school of
opinion, nor a mere religion, but a spiritual kingdom,
having its own legislature, tribunals, and executive.

(3.) A further effect will be to hasten the extinction
of the spirit of nationalism which for many centuries
has troubled the Church. The Church has already had
three periods : first, when it was made up of indivi-
duals, or at most of households, before as yet an entire
nation was converted to the faith; secondly, when
the nations were gathered into the Catholic fold, and
the laws of unity and authority kept in check the
ambition, jealousy, and encroachments of princes and
rulers ; thirdly, when the rise of modern nations began
to develop the seeds of insubordination and schism ;
lastly, we have now entered a period in which hardly
a Catholic nation exists. The kingdoms of Europe

have either separated altogether, like Prussia and
England, from the fold : or, like France and Belgium,
having lost their internal unity of faith, they have se-
parated their public laws from the unity of the Church,
It is evident that at this moment there is hardly a
government on earth which acknowledges the Catholic
Church to be its guide. Governments, the public
law of States, and international law, have all departed,
some more and some less, from the laws of the
Church. Nations, as political societies, are no longer
Catholic. But the masses of the people in many
countries, and a large proportion in others, remain
iirmly and vividly Catholic. Gallicanism, Josephism,
Anglicanism, were devices of government, and diseases
of the ruling classes. The people never shared them,
never understood them; would have rejected them if
they had; and do reject them as soon as they come to
see that the choice lies between a State religion and
the faith of Christendom, between a royal supremacy
and the authority of the Vicar of Christ. To this
clearer understanding a General Council will contri-
bute. The supreme spiritual independence of the
Church, convened by its head, without dependence on
any civil power, freely legislating for the whole Catholic
unity, must appeal to every pure instinct of Christians,
The withdrawal of Christian nations, or of their
public laws, from the unity of the faith, has pro-
duced in past times prolonged conflicts between the
supreme spiritual and civil powers. In England, to
pass over all other countries, the penal l#ws in matters

of religion, by which not only Catholics but Protestant
Nonconformists were persecuted, is a page of our
history over which we are happy to be able now to
draw a veil. So long as the civil power exacted
conformity and obedience in matters spiritual, the
conscience of Catholics placed them in an unnatural
state of passive opposition to supreme authority. It
is the dictate of our conscience, founded upon the
words of our Lord and of His Apostles, upon the
precepts of the Fathers, and the decrees of Councils,*
that we should render true and faithful obedience in
all civil matters to our lawful prince. An oath of
pure civil obedience Catholics are bound by their
religion to make, from their hearts, to the person of
their sovereign, f Happily, all the elements of religious
and ecclesiastical matter, which used to be mixed
up with these civil oaths, have gradually been
purged away. The laws of England, with the ex-
ception only of a few lingering stains of the old anti-

* Concil. Toletan. iv. c. 75 : ' Sacrilegium quippe est si vio-
letur agentibus Regum suorum promissa fides, quia non solum in
eos fit pacti transgressio, sed et in Deum, in cujus nomine polli-
cetur ipsa promissio.' So also the tenth Council of Toledo, and
the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle. Suarez, Responsio ad Regis
Angliee Librum, lib. vi. c. 1.

t ' Cum enim uniuscuj usque Regis subditi, teste Paulo, ei parere,
et fidelitatem servare, et in omnibus quae ad potestatem Regiam
spectant, illi obedire teneantur, ut in libro 3. ostensum est, per se
manifestum est, juramentum de hac obedientia, et fidelitate ser-
vanda (quod juramentum fidelitatis appellamus) per se, et ex
objecto suo honestum esse : ac subinde et posse a Rege ad suam
majorem securitatem ac stabilitatem postulari, et tune a subditis
et exhiberi et servari debere.' — Suarez, ibid. lib. vi. Procem.

Catholic animosity, have become purely civil, and
therefore equal and just to all: and within that
sphere of civil life and civil obedience it is impossible
that collision or conflict should arise. The purely
spiritual action of the Church in a General Council
will tend to dispel the panic fears and traditional
suspicions in respect to the authority of popes, and to '
confirm the relations of freedom and of co-operation
which have arisen between the Catholic Church and
the civil powers, both in Catholic and Protestant
countries.

(4.) Further: a General Council, by purifying the
external status of the Church from local and national
taints which enfeeble its action, must add greatly to
its spiritual power. It is the genius of the Church to
unite its action to that of the civil power; to uphold,
direct, and consecrate it. But if civil governments
invade its spiritual office, it knows how to hold itself
aloof from all civil power, and to keep itself pure from
all contact with it. This is a condition favourable to
the Church, but adverse to society. Ireland is a sad
and sufficient proof. It has been well said that the
spiritual and civil powers are united in one person in
Eome, that they may be separated everywhere else.
The day seems to be past for the Church to unite itself
with the civil state of modern nations. They have
shattered their unity of religion, and have broken up
their public law, to conform it to their religious divi-
sions. Over such mixed states the Church has little
disposition to assume control. They are too alien from

its mind and essence. This separation of Church and
State, abnormal, and replete with moral and spiritual
dangers, is an established fact in the larger part of
the modern world. The Church can at least draw
from it this advantage, that if the State will no longer
invite it to save the people, its own spiritual action is
left free and pure.

(5.) Another change which demands an adjust-
ment of the laws of the Church is to be found in the
spoliations which the last centuries have perpetrated.
The Church has a divine right to hold property.
This right it has originally from its Divine Founder,
not from any human law. It is therefore lawful, good,
and expedient that it should hold and transmit endow-
ments which are the patrimony of the poor, and the
means of spiritual good to the millions of Christendom.
The sixteenth century began to spoil, and the revolu-
tions of the last fifty years have swept those endow-
ments away in one half of Europe. The spoiler is again
busy to rob the Church in Italy of its birthright. The
spoliation of the Church is always, and everywhere, a
sin and a sacrilege ; nevertheless, the Church knows
how to draw power and strength even from spoliation.
There is no doubt that it will rise in Italy, as it has
risen in France and in Ireland, over all robbery and
wrong ; and rule the hearts of men with a renewed
power. The destruction of benefices has at least re-
leased us from patronage, secular interference, lay
abuses, with all the moral parasites which infected the
old order of nations. A General Council will know

G 2

100

how to deal with Regales, Sicilian monarchies, and
Organic Articles.

(6.) Lastly. Why should it seem to be the vision of
a dreamer to hope that from these things may arise a
new order, and a new Christian world? Christendom
is not more sick and shattered now than it was when
S. Gregory went to his rest. He died mourning over
its apparent dissolution ; and yet all the glories of the
Christendom of a thousand years arose out of the ruins
over which he sorrowed . The world is always changing,
rising and falling, swaying to and fro like the currents
of the great deep. Kingdoms, empires, confedera-
tions of Christian States, have formed, dissolved, and
passed by together. The Church alone stands stead-
fast and changeless. It has withstood, and it has
made new relations with, a Byzantine, a Frankish, a
German Empire, with Christian Europe, in its gra-
dual rise, its many vicissitudes, its perpetual insta-
bility. We are but in a new crisis of the old work
and conflict. A new European order, with new fron-
tiers, new centres, new powers, new dynasties, may
spring up around the See of Peter ; and the Pontiffs,
calm and changeless in their supremacy, will enter
into new relations with a new worldj upon old laws
which are changeless as the succession of seasons and
of tides. We are not shaken nor alarmed by revolu-
tions. We protest against them ; we may be crushed
by them; but we rise again. The Sovereign Pontiff,
in the last proposition of the Syllabus, condemned the
pert audacity of those who call upon the Pope to

101

reconcile himself with modern progress. It is for
modern progress to reconcile itself with the Pope.
The Christian world was founded upon the unity of
faith, the unity of Christian matrimony, the unity of
communion, the unity of one supreme authority in the
Church of God. The world seems to be putting off its
Christian unity, and returning to the divisions and
dissensions of the natural order. The Church cannot
yield a jot or a tittle of its divine laws of unity and
truth. The world may renew its ten persecutions ; but
the Pontiffs will be inflexible to the end. They have
counselled, warned, and entreated Princes and Legis-
latures. If rulers will not hear their voice, the
people will. And this, it would seem, may be the
future. The pastors know their flocks, and their
flocks know them. Through these, the Vicar of Jesus
Christ has spoken from the beginning, to the nations
and people of the world ; and the nations know his
voice. The Governments of the world may be
Febronian or Voltairian ; the spirit of Pombal and of
Kaunitz may survive in bureaus and portfolios;
but the instincts of the masses are Christian, and
the tendency of political society is everywhere to the
people. Of this we have no fear. The Church is
nowhere more vigorous than where it is in closest
sympathy with the people ; as in Ireland and Poland,
in America, Australia, and in England.

Such, then, Eeverend and dear Brethren, seems
to be, in outline at least, the moral import of this
eighteenth Centenary of S. Peter's martyrdom. It

102

has had great results already; it will have greater still.
We are at a period of singular moment. The nineteenth
century is more than half spent. It opened with a
series of revolutions which for fifty years have been
shaking, not Europe only, but the world. But there
is a turn in the tide of events. The moral and intel-
lectual power of the Catholic Church has been steadily
rising in the public opinion of every country. Its
action was never more wide-spread nor more kindly :
witness its expanding influences in the United States,
and in the colonies of the British Empire. At home it
is, perhaps, less kindly viewed, less kindly dealt with.
The tradition of. the Tudor spirit, which survives the
Tudor statutes, swept away though they be because
now obsolete, and obsolete because too unjust to be put
in execution; the historical prejudice, suspicion, fear,
and hatred against the Catholic Church, into which
we English are born, as into the fall of Adam; — all
this still survives to keep up a religious bitterness
which has been the disease and humiliation of our
country. Nevertheless, a clearer sky is opening.
These things are almost relegated now from the
sphere of legislation and from public opinion to the
haunts of moles and bats, to anti- Catholic factions,
to sections of religious parties, or to knots of indi-
viduals who have dropped behind the spiritual and
intellectual changes of our times.

But I cannot here do more than touch these things
in passing. To do more would need a treatise.
What has been said is enough to mark the importance

103

and the power of the events before us. They appeal
to our faith, and demand of us to act with courage
and with confidence in God and in the great laws by
which His Church is governed. A year ago, few
believed that at this time the Holy Father would be
in Eome. It was when the protection of earthly
power was about to leave him that he summoned this
great gathering. When Jerusalem was surrounded
by the Assyrians, Jeremias bought land in Anathoth.
In the face of all danger, and in defiance of all menace,
he gave this witness of his immoveable confidence in
the promise and power of God. And now, in the pre-
sence of a hostile world and all its perturbations, the
Pope proclaims a General Council. Let us not be un-
worthy of this example. The highest conception and
enunciation of Catholic truths and principles, without
compromise or transaction of any kind, and a calm
confidence that God will accomplish His own work in
His own time and way, by His own instruments and
power, is our duty. What these next years may
bring forth, none can say. The Holy Father has
declared that the General Council shall be opened on
a day marked in his Pontificate and in the history of
the Church for ever — the Feast of the Immaculate
Conception — but he has not fixed the year. We can-
not tell what winds and waves may sweep over
Europe and Italy. At any time the whole continent
may be on fire from east to west with a terrible
war of nations, embittered sevenfold by the working
of an ti- Christian revolutions. Italy, for its wanton

104

infidelity to the exuberant mercies of God in nature
and in grace, may receive its heaviest scourge. It
may be delivered over to its own will, and be deprived
for a time of the presence which makes it the first of
Christian nations. On all these contingencies the
mind of the Pontiff meditates. Calmly and surely he
will bide his time, in supernatural confidence that no
power of man can bind him when the hour of libera-
tion comes. Peter was bound with chains in Jeru-
salem, and again in Rome, and men have striven for
eighteen hundred years to bind his successors. Per-
secutors in Rome, emperors in Constantinople, heretics
in high places, Lombard kings, Counts of the Marches,
Norrnan dukes, Roman factions, French monarchs,
Infidel republics, Imperial conquerors, Gallican assem-
blies, secret societies, diplomacy without faith, — all in
succession have thought to bind the hands of Peter,
and in him to bind the Church of God. It is an old
tale. When men least look for it; when all seems
surest for their policy, on a sudden, without warning,
and as by the touch of unseen might, the fetters
fall off from the sacred hands. And in Peter the
Church goes forth free and sovereign.

Miris modis repente liber, ferrea,
Christo jubente, vincla Petrus exuit.
Ovilis ille Pastor, et Rector gregis,
Vitae recludit pascua et fontes sacros,
Ovesque servat creditas, arcet lupos.

Peter reigns still, Chief Shepherd of the one fold,
opening the pastures of life and the sacred fountains,

105

guarding the sheep, keeping off the wolves. The
General Council will meet when he sees the time, and
it will do its work. ' Yerbum Dei non est alligatum.'
4 Ubi Spiritus Domini ibi libertas.'

Already the preparations for this event are making
under the eye of the Holy Father. You will pray
daily that the Seven Gifts of the Holy Ghost may
rest abundantly upon him, and upon all who are
around him. When the Indiction of the Council
reaches me, I will call upon you to unite in a special
invocation of the Holy Ghost, the Author of unity
and the Spirit of Truth and Charity, and to offer the
Most Holy Sacrifice for the intentions of the Sove-
reign Pontiff.

I remain, Rev. and dear Brethren,

Your affectionate Servant in Christ,

* HENRY EDWARD,

ARCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER.

Sept 8, 1867.

APPENDIX

PUBLIC DOCUMENTS OF THE CENTENAKY.

1. ALLOCUTION OF HIS HOLINESS, JUNE 26.

2. HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS, JUNE 29.

3. ADDEESS PEESENTED BY THE BISHOPS JULY 1,

4. EEPLY OF HIS HOLINESS.

SANCTISSIMI DOMINI NOSTRI PII DIVINA PROVI-
DENTIA PAPAE IX. ALLOCUTIO HABITA IN
CONSISTORIO PUBLICO DIE XXVI. JUNII
MDCCCLXVII.

VENERABILES FRATRES,

Singular! quidem inter maximas Nostras acerbitates gaudio et
consolatione afficimur, cum iterum gratissimo conspectu ac fre-
quentia vestra perfrui, vosque coram alloqui in hoc amplissimo
conventu possimus, Venerabiles Fratres. Vos enim ex omnibus
terrarum regionibus desiderii Nostri significatione et vestrae
pietatis instinctu in hanc Urbem adducti, Vos eximia religione
praestantes, in sollicitudinis Nostrae partem vocati nihil potius
habetis, quam calamitosis hisce temporibus omnem in re Catholica
tuenda animarumque salute curanda vestram opem Nobis ferre,
multiplices moerores Nostros lenire, ac ampliora in dies vestrae fidei
voluntatis et obsequii, erga hanc Petri Cathedram experimenta
praebere. Hoc vestro adspectu recreamur vehementer, hoc novo
pietatis et amoris vestri argumento ac testimonio de illis libenter
recordamur, quae usque ad hanc diem concordibus animis, non uno
studiorum genere, non intermissis curis, non deterriti adversis
certatim edidistis. Quae porro rerum suavissimarum memoria alte
Nobis in animo infixa, semperque mansura, illud efficit, ut gratus
Nostrae caritatis sensus, multo nunc quam alias ardentior atque
vividior, erga universum vestrum ordinem perspicua testificatione
et luculentioribus signis, palam publiceque gestiat erumpere.

Sed si hasc leviter raptimque perstricta superiorum temporum
recordatio Nos adeo percellit atque solatur, Vos ipsos, Venerabiles
Fratres, facile intellecturos arbitramur qua laetitia exultet, qua
caritate flagret hodie cor Nostrum, dum iterum observantia et fre-
quentia vestra perfruimur, qui ex remotioribus etiam Catholicis
provinciis Nostro desiderio perspecto, una omnes pietate et amore

110

acti ad Nos convenistis. Nihil enim Nobis optatius, nihil jucun-
dius esse potest quam vestro in coetu versari, vestrasque Nobiscum
conjunctionis fructum capere, in iis potissimum solemnibus per-
agendis in quibus omnia, quae versantur ante oculos, de Catholics
Ecclesia3 unitate, de immobili unitatis fundamento, de praeclaro
ejus tuendaa servandaeque studio, ac gloria loquuntur. De ilia
scilicet admirabili unitate loquuntur, qua, veluti quadam vena,
Divini Spiritus charismata et dona in mysticum Christi corpus
manant, ac in singulis ejus membris tanta ilia fidei et caritatis
exempla excitant, quas universum hominum genus in admirationem
impellunt. Agitur enim, Venerabiles Fratres, hoc tern pore ut
Sanctorum honores decernantur tot inclitis Ecclesiae Heroibus,
quorum plerique gloriosum martyrii certamen certantes, alii pro
tuendo Apostolicae Cathedrae, in qua veritatis et unitatis est cen-
trum, Principatu, alii pro integritate ac unitate fidei vindicanda,
alii pro restituendis Catholicae Ecclesiaa hominibus schismate
avulsis, pretiosam mortem libenter oppetierunt, adeo ut mirum
divinae Providentiae consilium satis eluceat, quae turn maxirne
exempla adserendae Catholicae unitatis, et triumphos Adsertorum
proposuit, cum Catholica fides et Apostolicae Sedis auctoritas
infestioribus inimicorum artibus conflictaretur. Agitur praeterea
ut memoriam diei auspicatissimi solemni ritu recolamus, quo die
Beatissimus Petrus et Coapostolus ejus Paulus ante annos mille
octingentos illustri martyrio in hac urbe perfuncti, immobilem
Catholicae unitatis arcem suo sanguine consecrarunt. Quid igitur,
Venerabiles Fratres, Nobis optabilius et tantorum Martyrum
triumphis congruentius esse poterat, quam ut in eorum honoribus
pulcherrima Catholicae unitatis exempla ac spectacula, majorequa
possent significatione et luce fulgerent ? Quid aequius erat, quam
ut haec ipsa de Apostolorum Principum triumphis gratulatio quas
ad totius Catholici nominis religionem pertinet, vestro etiam ad-
ventu studioque celebraretur ? Quid dignius demum, quam ut tot
tantorumque rerum splendor pietatis laetitiaeque vestrae accessio-
ne fieret illustrior ?

At non solum apta rebus et grata Nobis, Yenerabiles Fratres,
hsec pietas, et concors cum Apostolica Sede conjunctio, sed praeter-
ea tanti momenti est, ut maximi ex ea ac salutares admodum
fructus sive ad com pri men dam impiorum audaciam, sive ad com-
munem fidelium et vestram singulorum utilitatem, omnino debeant
existere. Ex hac nimirum lieligionis oppugnatores intelligant

Ill

necesse est, quam vigeat, qua vita polleat Catholica Ecclesia, quam
infensis animis insectari non desinunt ; discent quam inepto stul-
toque convicio earn veluti exhaustam viribus et suis defunctam
temporibus incusarint ; discent demum quam male suis trium-
phis plaudant, ac suis consiliis et conatibus fidant, satis perspi-
cientes tantam virium compagem convelli non posse, quam Jesu
Christi spiritus et divina virtus in Apostolicas confessionis petra
coagmentavit. Profecto si unquam alias hoc maxime tempore,
Venerabiles Fratres, omnibus pateat necesse est, ibi solum animos
arctissima inter se conjunctione contineri posse, ubi unusidemque
Dei spiritus omnibus dominatur; at Deo relicto, Ecclesiaa auctori-
tate contempta, homines felicitatis ejus quam per scelera quaerunt
expertes, in turbulentissimis tempestatibus misere, dissidiisque
jactari.

Sed si fidelium communis spectetur utilitas, quidnam, Venera-
biles Fratres, opportunius ac salutarius ad incrementum obsequii
erga Nos et Apostolicam Cathedram Catholicis gentibus esse
potest, quam si videant quanti a Pastoribus suis Catholicae unitatis
jura et sanctitas fiat, eamque ob causam cernant eos magna ter-
rarum spatia marisque transmittere, nee ullis deterreri incom-
modis, quominus ad Eomanam Cathedram advolent, ut in
Nostraj humilitatis persona Petri Successorem et Christi in terris
Vicarium revereantur ? Hac nempe auctoritate exempli longe
melius quam subtiliori qualibet doctrina agnoscant, qua venera-
tione, obedientia et obsequio erga Nos uti debeant ; Quibus in
persona Petri a Christo Domino dictum est ' Pasce agnos meos,
pasce oves meas,' iisque verbis suprema sollicitudo ac potestas in
universam Ecclesiam credita est atque commissa.

Quin etiam Vos ipsi, Venerabiles Fratres, Vos in sacro vestro
ministerio obeundo, ex hac erga Apostolicam Sedem observantia
insignem fructum laturi estis. Quo enim majora vos necessi-
tudinis fidei amorisque vincula cum angulari petra mystici asdificii
devinxerint, eo magis etiam, uti omnium Ecclesise temporum
memoria docet, earn fortitudinem induemini ac robur, quod ab
amplitudine ministerii vestri contra hostiles impetus, et adversi-
tates rerum postulatur. Quid enim aliud Christus Dominus
intelligi voluit cum Petrum tuendae fratrum firmitati praeficiens,
'Ego, inquit, rogavi pro te, ut non deficiat fides tua, et tu
aliquando con versus confirma fratres tuos ' ? * Nimirum, ut

* Luc. xxii, 32.

112

S. Leo M. innuit, ' specialis cura Petri a Domino suscipitur et
pro fide Petri proprie supplicatur, tamquam aliorum status
certior sit futurus, si mens Principis victa non fuerit. In Petro
ergo omnium fortitude munitur, et divinae gratias ita ordinatur
auxilium, ut firmitas quas per Christum Petro tribuitur, per Pe-
trum apostolis caeteris conferatur.' * Quapropter Nos semper
persuasum habuimus fieri non posse ut ejus fortitudinis qua prae-
cipuo Domini munere cumulatus est Petrus, non aliqua semper in
vobis fieret accessio, quoties prope ipsam Petri personam qui suis
in successoribus vivit praesentes consisteretis, ac tantummodo
solum attingeretis hujus Urbis, quam sacri Apostolorum Principis
sudores et triumphalis sanguis irrigavit. Immo etiam, Yene-
rabiles Fratres, nunquam Nos dubitavimus quin ex ipso sepulcro
ubi beatissimi Petri cineres ad religionem Orbis sempiternam
quiescunt, quaedam arcana vis et salutaris virtus existat, quae
Pastoribus Dominici gregis fortes ausus, ingentes spiritus, magn-
animos sensus inspiret, quaeque instaurato eorum robore efficit,
ut impudens hostium audacia, Catholicaa unitatis virtuti et potes-
tati impar, impari etiam certamine residat et corruat.

Nam quid Nos tandem dissimulemus, Venerabiles Fratres ?
Jamdiu in acie contra callidos et infestos hostes pro justitiae et
Keligionis defensione versamur. Tarn diuturna tarn ingens dimi-
catio geritur, ut omnium quotquot in sacra militia censentur
simul conjunctaa vires, non justo maj ores numero ad resistendum
esse videantur. Nos quidem Ecclesias causam libertatem et jura
pro supremi muneris Nostri ratione propugnantes, usque ad hanc
diein Dei Omnipotentis ope ab exitialibus periculis incolumes
fuimus ; sed tamen rapimur et jactamur adhuc adversis ventis et
fluctibus, non quidem timentes naufragium quod Christi Domini
prassens auxilium timere non sinit, sed intimo sane dolore affecti
obtotnovarum doctrinarum monstra, tot impie in Ecclesiam ipsam
et Apostolicam Sedem commissa, quae quidem jam alias damnata
ac reprobata, f palam nunc iterum pro sacri Nostri muneris
officio reprobamus et condemnamus. In hac tamen praesentis
temporis ratione, et in ea quam capimus ex conspectu vestro
loetitia, ultro commemorare praetermittimus tot sollicitudines,
curas, angores qui cor Nostrum gravi ac diuturno vulnere excru-
ciant ac torquent. Haec potius omnia apud altaria afFeremus quae
Nostris assidue oneravimus precibus, respersimus lacrimis ; hasc

* Ser. iii. in anniv, Ass. suse. f Alloc. Consist. 29 Oct. 1866.

113

omnia Clementissimo misericordiarura Patri instauratis obsecra-
tionibus aperiemus iterum ac revelabimus, in Eo omnino fidentes
qui Ecclesiae suae incolumitatem et gloriam tueri novit et potest,
quique judicium faciens omnibus injuriam patientibus de causa
Nostra et adversantium Nobis, non fallente die, justo judicio
judicabit.

Interim vero vos, Venerabiles Fratres, pro spectata vestra
sapientia recte intelligitis quam vehementer intersit ad occur-
rendum impiorum consiliis et tot detrimenta Ecclesiae sarcienda,
ut quae vestrum omnium cum Nobis et Apostolica hac Sede con-
cordia tantopere enitet, altius in dies defixis radicibus roboretur.
Quin immo, hie Catholicae conjunctionis amor, qui ubi semel in-
haesit animis, ad aliorum etiam utilitatem late dimanat, hie pro-
fecto vos conquiescere non sinet, nisi pariter in eadem Catholica
concordia ac indivulsa fidei, spei caritatisque consensione eccle-
siasticbs omnes viros quorum Duces estis, et universes fideles
vobis concreditos una opera praestare connitamini. Nullum sane
spectaculum angelorum atque hominum oculis pulchrius esse
poterit, quam si in hac peregrinatione nostra, qua ab exilio ad pa-
triam pergimus, asmula imago referatur et ordo peregrinationis
illius, qua duodecim Ismeliticae tribus ad felices promissionis
oras conjunctis itineribus contendebant. Ingrediebantur enim
omnes, singulae suis discretae auctoribus, distinctae nominibus,
diremptae locis, parebantque suis quseque familia patribus, bella-
torum manus ducibus, hominum multitude principibus ; sed ta-
men unus erat tot ex gentibus populus, qui Eidem Deo et ad
eamdem supplicabat aram, unus qui iisdem legibus, eidem Sacer-
doti Maximo Aaroni, eidem Dei Legato obtemperabat Mosi, unus
qui pari jure in bellorum laboribus et victoriarum fructibus ute-
batur, unus demum qui pariter sub tentoriis agens, et admirabili
vescens cibo, eamdem concordibus votis adspirabat ad metam.

Hujusmodi vos conjunction! perpetuo retinendae operam daturos,
tot jam pignoribus vestrae fidei concordiaeque acceptis, certum
omnino ac exploratum habemus. Spondet id Nobis spectata
vestra integritas, ac praestans virtus, quae semper ubique sui
similis, et omni perieulo major effulsit : spondet illud ingens
studium et ardor qui vos ad aeternam hominum salutem curan-
dam, et ad divinam amplificandam gloriam rapit atque urget :
spoudet id demum ac certissime spondet sublimis ilia oratio, quam
Christus ipse ante extremos cruciatus suos ad Patrem obtulit,

114

Ilium precatus, 'ut omnes unum sint, sicut tu Pater in me et ego
in Te, ut et ipsi in Nobis unum sint';* cui precationi fieri
nunquam potest, ut Divinus non adnuat Pater.

Nobis autem, Venerabiles Fratres, nihil optabilius est quam ut
eum fructum quern maxime salutarem ac faustum Ecclesiae uni-
versaB fore ducimus, ex hac eadem vestra cum Apostolica Sede
conjunctione capiamus. Jamdiu enim animo agitavimus, quod
pluribus etiam Venerabilium Fratrum Nostrorum pro rerum
adjunctis innotuit. ac illud etiam, ubi primum optata Nobis op-
portunitas aderit, efficere aliquando posse confidimus, nempe ut
sacrum oecumenicum et generale omnium Episcoporum Catholici
Orbis habeamus Concilium, quo collatis consiliis conjunctisque
studiis necessaria ac salutaria remedia, tot praesertim malis quibus
Ecclesia premitur, Deo adjuvante adhibeantur. Ex hoc profecto
uti maximam spem habemus eveniet, ut Catholicae veritatis lux
errorum tenebris, quibus mortalium mentes obvolvuntur amotis,
salutare suum lumen diffundat, quo illi veram salutis et justitice
semitam, adspirante Dei gratia, agnoscant et instent. Ex hoc
item eveniet, ut Ecclesia veluti invicta castrorum acies ordinata
hostiles inimicorum conatus retundat, impetus frangat, ac de ipsis
triumphans Jesu Christi Regnum in terris longe lateque propa-
get ac proferat.

Nunc vero ut vota Nostra impleantur, utque Nostrae vestrse-
que curae uberes justitiae fructus Christianis afferent populis,
ad Deum omnis justitiae et bonitatis fontem erigamus oculos, in
quo omnis plenitude praesidii, et gratiae ubertas sperantibus col-
locata est. Cum autem advocatum apud Patrem habeamus
Jesum Christum Filium Ejus, Pontificem magnum qui penetravit
Coelos, qui semper vivens interpellat pro nobis, quique in admir-
abili Eucharistiae Sacramento nobiscum est omnibus diebus usque
ad consummationem saeculi, hunc Redemptorem amantissimum,
Venerabiles Fratres, ponamus ut signaculum super cor nostrum,
ut signaculum super brachium nostrum, a$que ad altare illud, ubi
ipse Auctor gratis thronum misericordise constituit, ubi omnes
qui laborant et onerati sunt, reficiendi cupidus expectat, nostras
assidue preces omni cum fiducia deferamus. Eum itaque sine
intermissione humiliterque obsecremus, ut Ecclesiam suam a
tantis calami tatibus et omni discrimine eruat, eique laatam pacis
vicem, victoriamque de hostibus donet, ut Nobis ac Vobis novas

* S. Joan. xvii. 21

115

usque vires ad sui Nominis gloriam provehendam addat, ut illo
igne quern venit mittere in terras hominum animos inflammet, ac
errantes omnes potenti sua virtute ad salutaria consilia convertat.
Vestraa autem pietatis erit, Yenerabiles Fratres, illud omni ope
curare ut crediti vobis fideles in cognitione Domini Nostri Jesu
Christi in dies crescant, Eumque in Sacramento Augusto prae-
sentem, constanti fide venerentur, redament ac frequenter invisant,
nihilque erit vestro studio curaque dignius, quam ut, vigilantibus
ad Ejus aram ignibus, vigilet etiam in cordibus fidelium gratus
pietatis sensus, vigilet indeficiens flamma caritatis.

Quo vero fkcilius Deus ad obsecrationes nostras aurem suam
propitius inclinet, semper et enixe petamus suffragia, primum
quidem Deiparae Yirginis Mariae Immaculate, quo nullum apud
Deum potentius patrocinium ; deinde Sanctorum Apostolorum
Petri et Pauli, quorum Natalitia acturi sumus, nee non omnium
Ccelitum Sanctorum qui cum Christo regnantes in Coolis munera
divinaa largitatis hominibus sua deprecatione conciliant.

Denique Vobis, Venerabiles Fratres, ac aliis omnibus Venera-
bilibus Fratribus Catholicarum gentium Episcopis, item fidelibus
omnibus Vestra3 atque illorum curaa concreditis, quorum pietatis
et amoris eximia semper testimonia accepimus et continenter in
dies experimur. singulis universis Apostolicam Nostram Benedic-
tionem cum omni felicitatis voto conjunctam, ex iutimo corde
amantissime impertimus.

116

II.

Sanctissimi Domini Nostri PII, Divina Providentia
PAP^; IX., Homilia, habita in Basilica Vaticana
inter Miss arum Solemnia, die xxix. Junii
MDCCCLXVII., in sceculari festo Sanctorum Apo-
stolorum Petri et Pauli, atque canonizatione unius
et viginti Marty rum, et Confessorum Pauli a Cruce,
Leonardi a Portu Mauritio, ac Virginum Marice
Franciscce a vulneribus D. N. J. C. et Germans
Cousin. Romce, MDCCCLXVII.

Optatissimus, Venerabiles Fratres, ac Dilecti Filii, illuxit dies,
quo Nobis singular! Dei beneficio datum est saecularia solemnia
Beatissimi Petri Apostolorum Principis, et Coapostoli ejus Pauli
triumphis sacra concelebrare, ac pluribus divinae nostras religionis
heroibus Sanctorum cultum et honores decernere. Itaque exsul-
temus in Domino, et spirituali jucunditate laetemur, cum gloriosus
recurrat dies summa universi Catholici orbis, et hujus praasertim
nostrae urbis veneratione et gaudio colendus. Hoc enim solemni
die Petrus et Paulus Ecclesias luminaria, Martyres summi, legis
Doctores, amici Sponsi, oculi Sponsae, Pastores gregis, mundi
custodes ad caelestia regna felici martyrio conscenderunt.* Isti
sunt viri, per quos tibi Evangelium Christi, Roma, resplenduit,
et quae eras magistra erroris, facta es discipula veritatis ; Isti
sunt, qui te regnis co3lestibus inserendam multo melius, multoque
felicius condiderunt, quam illi, quorum studio prima mcenium
tuorum fundamentalocata sunt. Isti sunt, qui te adhanc gloriam
provexerunt, ut gens sancta, populus electus, civitas sacerdotalis,
et regia per sacram Beati Petri Sedem caput orbis effecta latius

* S. Petrus Dam. Serin. 27 de SS. Apost. Petr. et Paul.

117

pnesideres religione divina, quam dominationc terrena.*' Hi sunt
conjunct! Viri habentes splendidas vestes, Viri misericordiae, ac
nostri veri patres, verique pastores, qui nos per Evangelium
genuerunt. Quis autem Petro gloriosior ? qui divino illustratus
lumine primus omnium agnovit, omnibusque patefecit altissimum
Majestatis a3terno3 arcanum, et confitendo Christum Dominum vivi
Dei esse Filium, validissima invictaque nobis credendi fundamenta
constituit.f Ipse firmissima est petra, supra quam seterni Patris
Filius Ecclesiam suam tanta soliditate fundavit, ut adversus earn
portJE inferi prsevalere nunquam possint. Ipsi a Christo Domino
traditae sunt claves regni cselorum, etsuprema commissa potestas,
et cura pascendi agnos et oves, confirmandi Fratres, ac universam
regendi Ecclesiam, et cujus fides nunquam defectura, neque in
suis successoribus, qui in hac Romana Cathedra sunt collocatL
Quis beatior Paulo ? qui a Domino electus, ut portaret nomen
suum coram gentibus, et regibus, et filiis Israel,} pro suarum
remuneratione virtutum tertium raptus ad coelum coelestia secreta
cognovit, ut Ecclesiarum futurus Doctor inter Angelos disceret,
quod inter homines prsedicaret.§ Hi beatissimi Petrus et Paulus
sacramentum novae legis uno spiritu praedicantes omnia pericula,
difficultates, labores, po3nas, cruciatusque constanter pro Domino
perpessi, Christi uomen et religionem in Gentes invexerunt, et
Paganam philosophiam vicerunt, Idololatriam e solio deturbarunt,
ac sanctissimis suis gestis, scriptisque evangelica3 veritatis lucem
longe lateque diffuderunt, cum in omnem terram exiverit sonus
eorum, et in fines orbis terrse verba eorum, ac sub unius passione
diei doctrinam suam pio sanguine et morte fortissima consecrarint.
Itaque, Venerabiles Fratres, ac Dilecti Filii, eorumdem Aposto-
lorum gloriam solemni ritu, et maxima laetitia concelebrantes, et
sacros eorum cineres, ad quos feliciter stamus, omni veneratione
prosequentes, clarissima illorum gesta sermonibus praedicemus,
atque in primis eorum virtutes ornni studio imitemur.

Jam vero summo quoque gaudio perfundimur, quandoquidern
Deus Nobis tribuit hoc felicissimo die Sanctorum cultum, et
honores decernere invictis Christi Martyribus Josaphat Kunce-
vicio Polocensi Ruthenorum Antistiti, Petro Arbuesio, Nicolao

* S. Leo Serm. 82, al. 80, in Natali Apostolorum Petri et Pauli.
f S. Maximus Homil. 68 in Natali Apostolorum Petri et Pauli.
I Act. Apost. ix. 15.
§ S. Maximus ibidem.

118

Pichio, ejusque duodeviginti sociis, et binis gloriosissimis Con-
fessoribus Paulo a Cruce, Leonardo a Portu Mauritio, ac duabus
clarissimis Virginibus Marias FranciscaB a vulneribus Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi, et Germanae Cousin. Qui omnes etiamsi
eadem nostra circumdati infirmitate, et peregrini hie in terris,
multisque tribulationibus, ac periculis subject!, tamen inconcussa
in Deum fide ac firmissiraa spe, et summa caritate incensi, ac pari
in proximum dilectione insignes, mortificationem Christi in corpore
circumferentes, et conformes facti imaginis Filii Dei, asperrima
quaaque pro Christi amore perpessi de carne, mundo, ac saevissimo
Daemone splendide triumpharunt, ac sanctitatis splendore, miris-
que prodigiis Catholicam illustrarunt Ecclesiam, et clarissima
nobis imitanda virtutum omnium reliquerunt exempla. Nunc
vero facti amici Dei in coelesti Jerusalem induti stolis albis exsul-
tant in gloria, et inebriantur ab ubertate domus Dei, propterea
quod Dominus laetificat eos in gaudio cum vultu suo, et torrente
voluptatis potat eos, ac fulgentes sicut sol coronati possident
palmam, et regnant cum Christo in aeternum, Eumque pro nobis
exorant, cum de propria immortalitate securi, sint adhuc de nostra
salute solliciti.

Humiles igitur, Yenerabiles Fratres, ac Dilecti Filii, Deo
totius consolationis agamus gratias, quod inter tantas, quibus
affligimur, Ecclesias, civilisque societatis calamitates, et pericula,
per hos clarissimos Martyres, Confessores, et Virgines nova ac
valida Ecclesiae suse sanctas praesidia, et illustria fidelibus populis
virtutum documenta dare sit dignatus. Summo autem studio
insignia horum Sanctorum vestigia sectemur, et iccirco ejusdem
fidei, spei, caritatisque in Deum spiritu magis in dies inflammati
terrestria despiciamus, et coelestia unice spectemus, atque alacriori
usque pede per semitas Domini ambulemus, et abnegantes saecu-
laria desideria sobrie, juste, ac pie vivamus, et omnes unanimes,
compatientes, fraternitatis amatores, misericordes, modesti, hu-
miles * per bona opera certam nostram vocationem, et electionem
facere studeamus.

Sed jam liceat Nobis cum omni humilitate, et fiducia, levare
oculos Nostros ad Te, Domine Deus Noster, qui dives in miseri-
cordia omnipotentiam Tuam parcendo maxime, et miserando
manifestas. Intuere propitius et respice Ecclesiam Tuam sanctam
tot undiquejactatam procellis, et humanam societatem tot agitatam

* S. Petr. Epist. 1. c. 3, v. 8.

119

turbinibus, ac per merita Apostolorum Tuorum Pelri et Pauli, et
istorum Martyrum, Confessorum et Virginum averte iram Tuam
a nobis, et multiplica super nos misericordiam tuam, et fac
omnipotent! Tua virtute, ut Ecclesia de suis hostibus triumphans
ubique terrarum magis in dies prospere, feliciterque propagetur,
et omnes populi, cunctis depulsis erroribus, cunctisque vitiis profli-
gatis, occurrant in unitatem fidei, et agnitionis Filii Tui Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi, ac divina Tua dextera urbem hanc ab omni-
bus inimicorum insidiis, conatibusque tuerc, ac defende.

120

III.

BEATISSIME PATER,

Apostolica Tua vox iterum auribus nostris insonuit, nuncians
novum seternae veritatis triumphum, sanctorum ccelitum gloria
refulgentem, antiquum Urbis aeternas, Beatorum Apostolorum
Petri et Pauli sanguine consecratae decus, quorum martyrii
memoria sascularis rediens, totum hodie Orbem Christianum
laetitia afficit et fidelium mentes ad salutarem maximarum rerum
cogitationem extollit.

Jucundissima apostolici oris ad festa talia nos peramariter invi-
tantis verba percipere minime potuimus, quin continuo subiret
animum solemnium illorum memoria, quaa ante annps quinque
Tuo lateri adstantes in urbe peregimus, et grati recordaremur,
qua tune nos benignitate et humanitate habueris, qua nos paterna
caritate fueris in ilia faustissima gratulatione complexus. Haac
suavis recordatio, haec amantissimi Patris non tarn jubentis quam
optantis vox illam animis nostris ad Romanum iter capessendum
alacritatem adjecit, quam Tibi, Beatissime Pater, satis luculenter
amplissima haac Antistitum frequentia, qui tertiuni ad Te conflux-
erunt, et communis omnium pietas ac fidelis observantia declarant.
Tarn ingenti Antistitum numero, cui vix simile quid in prseterita-
rum aetatum memoria reperitur, par solummodo est Tua in nos
charitas ac benevolentia, par unice obsequii amorisque in Te
nostri magnitude. Hisce autem causis vehementius hodie excita-
mur, ut eximias virtu tes Tuas, Sedem Apostolicam novo illus-
trantes lumine, novo etiam prosequamur honore, et augustissimum
Tuum animum graves inter, quibus premeris at non concuteris,
aerumnas, iterate amoris et admirationis testimonio coram solemur.

Sed dum votis obsecuti sumus Tuis, alium etiam optatissimum
nobis spectavimus fructum, ut scilicet cor nostrum tot Ecclesiae
malis sauciatum paterni Tui vultus recrearemus adspectu, frater-
nam inter nos concordiam magis magisque roboraremus, ac com-
munem Tibi nobisque solatii et gaudii materiem quaereremus,

121

Hanc vero laetandi causam Tu maximam nobis praestas, dum
tot nova sanctorum nomina fastis Ecclesiae inscribens homines
potenter edoces, quanta sit quamque iuexhausta matris Ecclesiae
fcecunditas. Hanc triumphantium gloriosus martjruin sanguis
exornat ; hanc inviolatae confessionis Candida induit virginitas,
hujus floribus nee rosae nee lilia desunt. Tu, coelestia virtutum
prsemia mortalibus ostendens, oculos a rerum inanium conspectu
ad jucundam cosli gloriam erigere doces. Tu, dum homines
mirandis ingenii sui industriaeque operibus exsultant, triumphale
sanctorum Dei vexillum a.ttollens illos admones, ut, super ipsam
rerum adspectabilium et gaudiorum humanorum pompam ac spe-
ciem, oculos ad Deum omnis sapientiaa et pulchritudinis fontem
convertant, ne ii, quibus dictum fuit * Subjicite terrain et domina-
nimV obliviscantur unquam supremi illius prascepti, ' Dominum
Deum tuum adorabis et illi soli servies.'

Ast qui suspicientes co3lestem Jerusalem, novorum sanctorum
gloria gestientem, mirabilia Domini humili corde agnoscimus et
profitemur, magis etiam ad hasc celebranda incendimur, dum
hodierna saeculari solemnitate immotam contemplamur petrae illius
firmitatem, super quam Dominus ac Redemptor noster Ecclesiaa
suae molem perpetuitatemque constituit. Divina enim virtute
factum cernimus, ut Petri Cathedra, organum veritatis, unitatis
centrum, fundamentum et propugnaculum libertatis Ecclesiae, tot
inter rerum adversitates et non intermissa hostium molimina
octodecim jam elapsis plane sseculis, stet firma incolumisque ;
dum regna et imperia surgunt ruuntque vicissim, stet veluti secura
pharus in procelloso vitas asquore mortalium iter dirigens,
tutamque stationem et portum salutis sua luce commonstrans.

Hac fide, hisce sensibus ducti loquebamur olim, Beatissime
Pater! cum ante quinquennium Tuo throno adstantes sublimi
Tuo ministerio debitum testimonium dedimus, votaque pro Te,
pro civili Tuo principatu, pro justitias ac religionis causa palam
nuncupavimus. Hac fide ducti verbis scriptoque eo tempore
professi sumus, nihil nobis potius et antiquius esse, quam ut quaa
Tu Ipse credis ac doces, nos quoque credamus et doceamus, quos
rejicis errores, nos item rejiciamus. Te duce unanimes incedamus
in viis Domini, Te sequamur, Tibi adlaboremus ac Tecum pro
Domino in omne discrimen fortuuamque parati decertemus.
Cuncta haec, quae tune declaravimus, nunc denuo piissimo cordis
sensu confirmamuSj idque universe orbi testatum esse volumus ;

122

grato simul recolentes animo, plenoque laudantes assensu, quae
a Te in salutem fidelium et Ecclesiae gloriam ab eo quoque tempore
gesta fuerunt.

Quod enim Petrus olim dixerat, ' non possumus quce vidimus et
audivimus non loqui] Tu pariter sanctum et solemne habuisti, ac
nunquam non habere luculenter demonstras. Non enim unquam
obticuit os Tuum. Tu aeteruas veritates annunciare, Tu sseculi
errores, naturalem supernaturalemque rerum ordinem atque ipsa
ecclesiasticae civilisque potestatis fundamenta subvertere mini-
tantes, apostolic! eloquii gladio configere, Tu caliginem novarum
doctrinarum pravitate mentibus offusam dispellere, Tu quae neces-
saria ac salutaria sunt turn singulis hominibus, turn Christianas
families, turn civili societati, intrepide effari, suadere, commendare
supremi Tui ministerii es arbitratus ; ut tandem cuncti assequan-
tur quid hominem Catholicum tenere, servare ac profiteri oporteat.
Pro qua eximia cura maximas Sanctitati Tuaa gratias agimus,
habituri sumus sempiternas ; Petrumque per os Pii locutum fuisse
credentes, quae ad custodiendum depositum a Te dicta, confirmata,
prolata sunt, nos quoque dicimus, confirmamus, annuntiamus,
unoque ore atque animo rejicimus omnia, quae divinae fidei, saluti
animarum, ipsi societatis humanae bono adversa, Tu ipse repro-
banda ac rejicienda judicasti. Firmum enim menti nostrae est,
alteque defixum, quodPatresFlorentini in decreto unionis unani-
mes definiverunt : Romanum Pontificem * Christi Vicarium,
totiusque Ecclesia caput et omnium Chrislianorum Patrem et
Doctorem existere, et ipsi in beato Petro pascendi, regendi ac
gubernandi Universalem Ecclesiam a Domino Nostro Jesu Cftristo
plenam potestatem traditam esss.'

Sed alia pra?terea sunt, quas nostram in Te caritatem, gratosque
animi sensus provocant. Magna enim cum jucunditate admira-
mur heroicam illam virtu tern, qua perniciosis saeculi machina-
tionibus obsistendo, dominicum gregem in via salutis servare,
contra seductiones erroris munire, contra vim potentiumetfalsorum
sapientum astutiam tueri adnisus es. Admiramur studium illud
fatigari nescium, quo emolumenta universae Ecclesiae, apostolica
providentia Orientis et Occidentis populos complexus, promovere
nunquam destitisti. Admiramur magnificum illud, quod generi
hominum in pejus quotidie ruenti Pastori boni spectaculum
exhibes, ipsorum etiam veritatis inimicorum animos percellens,
oculosque ad se vel invitos ipsa rerum praestantia et dignitate
convertens.

123

Pergeigitur Pastorum Pastoris vicaria potestate fungens, divini
Tui muneris partes Deo confisus tueri ; perge vitae seterme
subsidiis pascere Tibi creditas oves ; perge sanare contritiones
Israel, et agnos Cliristi quserere qui perierant. Faxit Deus Omni-
potens, ut, qui amoris Tui et olficii sui immemores voci Tuns
adhuc resistunt, meliora secuti consilia ad Te tandein redeuntes,
luctum Tuuin in gaudium convertant. Tuarum pastoralium
curaruoi fructus, divina benignitate adspirante,, incrementum
capiant in dies ; felix animarum conversio, quam Deus Te ad-
ministro quotidie operatur, magis magisque amplificetur ; Tuque
virtutum Tuarum vi et glorioso laborum successu animabus
Christo lucrifactis, prolatisque regrii ejus finibus, cum Domino et
Magistro vere exclamare possis, ' Omtte, quod dat mihi Pater, ad
me venietJ

Ha3C immo, Beatissime Pater, salutaris ac felicioris sevi indicia
conspiciuntur. Testis amor ille, quern cunctarum nationum fideles
ad quaevis pro Te exantlanda parati commonstrant, dum vires cor-
poris et animi atque adeo vitam ipsam pro Ecclesise juribus et
Apostolicoe Sedis gloria adserenda impendere ac dicare gestiunt.
Testis prona ilia Catholicarum mentium reverentia, qua? te su-
premum Pastorein cupide intuetur, quae Apostolicae Cathedrae
oracula lastanter excipit, iisque firmissirno adsensu et obsequio
adhasrere gloriatur. Testis ilia filialis animi indoles, qua populus
Christianus vestigia fidelium sequens, qui olim ad pedes Aposto-
lorum facultates suas sponte deferebant, rerutn Tuarum angustiis
hucusque occurrit, et contineuter eas sublevare non desinit. Hsec
filialis argumenta pietatis intimo pectore comrnoti cernimus, nun-
quam non operam daturi, ut sacer hie ignis in cordibus fidelium
accensus foveatur et vigeat, utque turn nostro turn cleri totius
exemplo ariimati omnes pra3claram illam voluntatem ac liberalita-
tem provehant, Tibique ad aeternam eorum salutem plenius procu-
randam temporalia adjumenta suppeditent.

Qui autem fidelium omnium erga Te pietate tantopere afficimur,
Beatissime Pater, peculiaris gaudii fructum capimus ex ilia fide,
ex illo amore et obsequio, quo digni asternaa Urbis cives Te Pa-
trem, Te Principem indulgentissimum complectuntur. Felicem
populum ac vera sapientem ! qui novit quas sibi amplitude et
gloria ex Petri Sede in Urbe constituta proveniat, qui intelligit
non alios terminos divinaa erga se benignitati definitos fore, quam
quos ipse sibi in sua erga Christi Vicarium observantia et in
Principem Sacratissimum amore constituent. Ha3c concupisce,

124

hsec sequere, Romana gens; sit haec constans, sit immota pietas;
sit haec Romana Urbs, quam Christianus Orbi? caeterarum
principem suamque lubens agnoscit, caeteris exemplo praelucens,
sit coelestibus gratiis donisque florens, virtutibus opibusque beata.

Id, Beatissime Pater, Tui Pontificatus splendor efFecit, quo
non Urbs solum Tua, sed universus orbis illustratur, cujusque
admiratio ita nos mo vet, ut ex illo exemplum pro sacro nostro
ministerio petendum esse existimemus.

At non minus Tua vox suaviter illabens pectoris ima pervadit,
quam virtutum Tuarum pontificalium imago animos nostros
percellit.

Summo igitur gaudio repletus est animus noster, dum e sacrato
ore Tuo intelleximus, tot inter pra3sentis temporis discrimina eo
Te esse consilio, ut maximum, prout aiebat inclitus Tuus prede-
cessor Paulus III, in maximis rei Christiana periculis remedium,
Concilium oecumenicum convoces.

Aunuat Deus huic Tuo proposito, cujus ipse Tibi mentem in-
spiravit ; habeantque tandem aevi nostri homines, qui infirmi in
fide, semper discentes et nunquam ad veritatis agnitionem per-
venientes omni vento doctrinae circumferuntur, in sacrosancta hac
Synodo novam, praesentissimamque occasionem accedendi ad sanc-
tam Ecclesiam, columnam ac firmamentum veritatis, cognoscendi
salutiferam fidem, perniciosos rejiciendi errores ; ac fiat, Deo pro-
pitio, et conciliatrice Deipara Immaculata, hasc Sjnodus grande
opus unitatis, sanctificationis et pacis, unde novus in Eccletiam
splendor redundet, novus regni Dei triumphus consequatur.

Et hoc ipso Tuae providentia3 opere denuo exhibeantur mundo
immensa beneficia, per Pontificatum Romanum humanas societati
asserta. Pateat cunctis, Ecclesiam, eo quod super solidissima Petra
fundetur, tantum valere, ut errores depellat, mores corrigat, bar-
bariem compescat, civilisque humanitatis mater dicatur et sit.
Pateat mundo, quod divinas auctoritatis et debitae eidem obedien-
tiae manifestissimo specimine, in divina Pontificatus institutione
dato, ea omnia stabilita et sacrata sint, quae societatum fundamenta
ac diuturnitatem solident.

Quod ubi perspexerint principes et populi, non permittent, ut
augustissimum Tuum jus, omnis auctoritatis, omnium jurium cer-
tissima sanctio, impune conculcetur ; imo ipsi curabunt, ut Tua
Tibi constet et potestatis libertas et libertatis potestas ; adsint
subsidia ad sublime Tuum, illisque ipsis summe proficuum minis-

125

terium efficaciter exercendum ; nee patientur, ut vox Tua a gregi-
bus Ecclesiae sanctae addictis prohibeatur, ne pabulo ceternarurn
veritatum privati misere contabescant, laxatisve apud eos obedien-
tice et reverentiae erga divinum in Te residens magisterium vin-
culis, ilia quoque auctoritas, qua reges regnant et legum conditores
justa decernunt, in certissimum status civilis detrimentum labe-
f'actetur.

Hsec est spes nostra, quam corde fovemus. Hoc continuum pre-
cum nostrarum est, semperque erit, argumentum.

Macte ergo animo, Beatissime Pater, perge navim Ecclesiaa
inter medias procellas secura, ut suevisti, manu ad portum addu-
cere. Mater divinas gratise, quam Tu pulcherrimo honoris titulo
salutasti, intercessionis suae auxilio tutabitur semitam tuam. Erit
Tibi in stellam maris, quam invicta. uti soles, fiducia suspicions,
non frustra diriges cursum ad Ilium, qui per earn ad nos venire
voluit. Faventes habebis coelestes Sanctorum choros, quorum
beatam gloriam magno studio continuisque apostolicis conatibus
exquisitam mundo exsultanti turn diebus istis, turn antehac annun-
ciasti. Assistent Tibi Principes Apostolorum Petrus et Paulus,
precibus potentibus sollicitudinem Tuam secundantes. In puppi,
quam Tu nunc occupas, Petrus olim sedebat ; ipse apud Dominum
intercedet, ut quae navis ipsius suffragiis adjuta octodecim saeculis
altum vitae humanae mare feliciter percurrit, Te duce, opimis im-
mortalium animarum spoliis onusta, coslestem portum plenis subeat
velis. Quod ut fiat, nos curarum, precum et laborum Tuorum
fideles devotosque socios habebis, qui divinam clementiam nunc
quoque deprecamur, ut Tibi omni benedictione coeleste cumulato
serventur augeanturque vires ; ut novis in dies animarum lucris
dives sit vita Tua, sit longaava in terris, sit olim in crelisbeata !

Marius Cardinalis Mattel, Episc. Ostien. et Veliternen., et
S. Collegii Decanus.

Constantinus Card. Patrizi, Episc. Portuen. et S. Rufina3.

Aloisius Card. Amat, Episc. Prsenestin.

Ludovicus Card. Altieri, Episc. Albanen.

Nicolaus Cardin. Clarelli Paracciani, Episc. Tusculan.

Philippus Card. De Angelis, Archiep. Firman.

Engelbertus Card. Sterchx, Archiep. Meclinien.

Aloisius Card. Vannicelli Casoni, Archiep. Ferrarien.

Cosmas Cardin. Corsi, Archiep. Pisan.

Dominicus Card. Carafa de Traetto, Archiep. Beneventan.

126

Xistus Card. Riario Sforza, Archiep. Neapolitan.

Jacobus Maria Cardin. Mathieu, Archiep. Bisuntin.

Frauciscus Augustus Cardin. Donnet, Archiep. Burdigalen.

Carolus Aloisius Cardin. Morichini, Episc. -^Esinus.

Joachim Cardin. Pecci, Episc. Perusin.

Antonius Benedictus Cardin. Antonucci, Episc. Anconitan.

Henricus Cardin. Orfei, Archiep. Ravennaten. et administra-
tor Dioecesis Caesanen.

Joseph. Maria Cardin. Milesi, Abbas Trium Fontium.

Michael Cardin. Garcia Cuesta, Archiep. Compostellan.

Joseph Aloisius Cardin. Trevisanato, Patr. Venetiarum.

Ludovicus Card. De La Lastra-y-Cuesta, Archiep. Hispalen.

Philippus Maria Cardin. Guidi, Archiep. Bononien.

Henricus Maria Cardin. de Bonnechose, Archiep. Rotho-
magen.

Paulus Cardin. Cullen, Archiep. Dublinen.

Rogerius Aloisius Antici Mattei, Patriarcha Constantinop.

Paulus Ballerini, Patriarcha Alexandrin.

Paulus Petrus Mashad, Patriarcha Antiochen. Maronitar.

Gregorius Joseff, Patr. Antiochen. Graec. rit. Melchitar.

Joseph Valerga, Patr. Hyerosolimitan.

Thomas Iglesias y Barcones, Patriarcha Indiar. Occideu.

Antonius Hassun, Primas Constantinop. Arm. rit.

Joannes Simor, Primas Regni Hungariae, Archiep. Strigon.

Aloisius Maria Cardelli, Archiep. Acriden.

Laurentius Trioche, Archiep. Babilonen.

Meletius, Archiep. Dramaten. Grasc. rit.

Petrus Apelian, Archiep. Marascen. Arm. rit.

Ignatius Kalybgian, Archiep. Amasien. Armen. rit.

Petrus Riccardus Kenrick, Archiep. S. Ludovici.

Petrus Cilento, Archiep. Rossanen.

Alexander Asinari de Sanmarzano, Archiep. Ephesin.

Alexander Angeloni, Archiep. Urbiuaten.

Georgius Kurmuz, Archiep. Siunien. Arm. rit.

Aloisius Clementi, Archiep. Epis. Ariminen.

Felicissimus Salvini, Archiep. Camerinen.

Eduardus Hurmuz, Archiep. Siracen. Armen. rit.

Raphael d'Ambrosio, Archiep. Dyrechien.

Julius Arrigoni, Archiep. Lucanus.

Joseph. De Bianchi Dottula, Archiep. Tranen. Nazaren. et
Barolen.

127

Eustachius Gonella, Archiep. Epis. Viterbien. et Tuscanien.

Joseph Rotundo, Archiep. Tarentin.

Gregorius De Luca, Archiep. Compsanus, Administrator

Campanien.

Joannes Hagian, Archiep. Cesarien. Armen. rit.
Joannes Baptista Purcell, Archiep. Cincinnaten.
Renatus Franciscus Regnier, Archiep. Cameracen.
Maximilianus De Tarnoczv, Archiep. Salisburgen.
Benjaminus, Archiep. Neaupolit.
Ellas Mellus, Archiep. Acren. et Zhibaren. Caldaeor.
Fridericus :de Furstenberg, Archiep. Olomucen.
Paulus Brunoni, Archiep. Taronen.
Joseph Matar, Archiep. Maronita Aleppensis.
Philippus Cammarota, Archiep. Cajetan.
Franciscus Xaverius Apuzzo, Archiep. Surrentin.
Cajetanus Rossini, Archiep. Epis. Melphiten. Jovenacen.et

Terlitien.

Petrus Villanova Castellacci, Archiep. Petr.
Vincentius Tizzani, Archiep. Nisiben.
Vincentius Spaccapietra, Archiepiscopus Srairnensis.
Marianus Ricciardi, Archiep. Reginen.
Carolus Pooten, Archiep. Antibaren. et Scodren.
Franciscus Emilius Cugini, Archiep. Mutinen.
Jacobus Bosagi, Archiep. Cassarien. Armen. rit.
Raphael Ferrigno, Archiep. Brundusin.
Salvator Nobili Vitelleschi, Archiep. Episc. Auximan. et Cm-

gulan.

Alexander Franchi, Archiep. Thessalonicen.
Petrus Bostani, Arcliiep. Tyren. et Sidonien. Maronit.
Patritius Leahy, Archiep. Casselien.
Josephus Hippolytus Guibert, Archiep. Turonen.
Marinus Marini, Archiep. Epis. Urbevetan.
Georgius Claudius Chalandon, Archiep. Aquen.
Gregorius Szymonowicz, Archiep. Leopolien. Armen. rit.
Joachim Limberti, Archiep. Florentiu.
Antonius Salomone, Archiep. Salernitan.
Philippus Gallo, Archiep. Patrassen.
Petrus Giannelli, Archiep. Sardien.

Joseph S. Alemanny, Arcliiep. S. Francisci de California.
Franciscus Pedicini, Archiep. Baren.

128

Emanuel Garcia Gil, Archiep. Csesaraugustan.

Arsenius Avak-Vartan-Angiarakian, Archiep. Tarsen. Armen.

rit.

Julianus Florianus Desprez, Archiep. Tolosan.
Ignatius Akkani, Archiep. Hauranan. Grasc. rit. Melchitar.
Franciscus Xaverius Wierzchleyski, Archiep. Leopolitan. rit.

Lat.

Spiridion Maddalena, Archiep. Corcyren.
Gregorius Balitian, Archiep. Aleppen. Armen. rit.
Joannes Maria Odin, Archiep. Novze Aureliae.
Joannes Martinus Spalding, Archiep. Baltimoren.
Leo Korkoruni, Archiep. Melitenen. Arm. rit.
Carolus de la Tour d'Auvergne-Lauraguais, Archiep.

Bithuricen.

Joannes Hagg, Archiep. Helipolitan. Maron.
Miecislaus Ledochowski, Archiep. Gnesnen. et Posnanien.
Walter Steins, Archiep. Epis. Bosrensis, Vicarius Apos. Calcut.
Primus Calvus Lopez, Archiep. S. Jacobi de Cuba.
Benvenutus Monzon y Martin, Archiep. Granaten.
Joseph Berardi, Archiep. Nicen.
Petrus Alexander Doimo Maupas, Archiep. Jadren.
Athanasius Raphael Ciarchi, Archiep. Babilonen. Syror.
Georgius Darboy, Archiep. Parisieii.
Antonius de Lavastida, Archiep. Mexican.
Clemens Munguia, Archiep. Mecoacan.
Paulus Hatem, Archiep. Aleppen. Grsec. rit. Melchitar.
Petrus Matah, Archiep. Jarizensis in Syria.
Ludovicus Anna Dubreuil, Archiep. Avenionen.
Joannes Ignatius Moreno, Archiep. Vallisolitan.
Martialis Guillelmus De Cosquer, Archiep. Portus Principis.
Laurentius Pergeretti, Archiep. Naxiensis.
Ludovicus Gonin, Archiep. Portus Hispanise.
Melchior Nasarian, Archiep. Marden. Armen. rit.
Darius Bucciarelli, Archiep. Scopien.
Franciscus Fie ix-y» Solans, Archiep. Tarraconen.
Ludovicus Haynald, Archiep. Colocen. et Baesien.
Basilius Michael Gasparian, Archiep. Cypren. Armen. rit.
Joannes Paulus Franciscus Maria Lyonnet, Archiep. Albien.
Henricus Eduardus Manning, Archiep. Westmonasterien.
Joseph Sembratowicz, Archiep. Nazianz. Grsec. rit.

129

Paulus Melchers, Archiep. Colonien.

Franciscus Xaverius de Merode, Archiep. Melitenen.

Antonius Rossi Vaccari, Archiep. Colossen.

Aloisius Ciurcia, Archiep. Irenopolitan.

Alexander Riecardi. Archiep. Taurinen.

Joseph Benedictus Dusmet, Archiep. Catanien.

Joseph Cardoni, Archiep. Edessen.

Joannes Baptista Landriot, Archiep. Bhemen.

Carolus Martial! s Alleraand Lavigerie, Archiep. Julia

Caesarien.

Aloisius Puecher Passavalli, Archiep. Iconien.
Aloisius Nazarri di Calabiana, Archiep. Mediolanensis.
Joannes Petrus Losanna, Episc. Bugellen.
Ignatius Giustiniani, Episc. Chien.
Raphael Sanctes Casanelli, Episc. Adiacen.
Guillelmus Aretini Sillani, Episc. jam. Terracinen.
Modestus Contratto, Episc. Aquen.
Theodosius Kojumgi, Episc. Sidonien. Melchitar.
Joseph Maria Severa. Episc. Interamnen.
Fridericus Gabriel de Marguerye, Episc. Augustodunen.
Meletius Findi, Episc. Heliopolitan. Graec. rit. Melchitar.
Franciscus Victor Rivel, Episc. Divianen.
Julianus Meirieu, Episc, Dinien.
Ludovicus Besi, Episc. Canopen.
Antonius Ranza, Episc. Placentin.
Dionisius Gauthier, Episc. Emausen.
Georgius Antonius Stahl, Episc. Herbipolen.
Andreas Rsess, Episc. Argentinen.
Carolus Gigli, Episc. Tiburtin.
Franciscus Maria Vibert, Episc. Maurianen.
Joannes Fennelly, Episc. Castorien.
Stephanus Ludovicus Charbonneaux, Episc. Jassen.
Petrus Paulus Lefevre, Episc. Zetlhan. Adminis. Deroiten.
Joannes Hilarius Boset, Episc. Emeriten.
Fredericus Manfredini, Episc. Patavin.
Nicolaus Grispigni, Episc. Fulginaten.
Guillelmus Augebault, Episc. Andegaven.
Joseph Armandus Gignoux, Episc. Bellovacen.
Joannes Baptista Berteaud, Episc. Tutelen.
EleoHorus Aronne, Episc. Montisalti.

130

Cajetanus Carli, Episc. Almiren.

Joannes Franciscus Wheland, Episc. Aureliopolitanus.

Joannes Thomas Ghilardi, Episc. Montis Regalis.

Paulus Georgius Dupont des Loges, Episc. Meten.

Petrus Severini, Episc. Sappaten.

Petrus eToseph De Preux, Episc. Sedunen.

Joannes Donney, Episc. Montisalbani.

Carolus Fridericus Roussalet, Episc. Sagien.

Jacobus Bailies, Episc. jam Lucionen.

Joannes Williams, Episc. Bostonien.

Cajetanus Carletti, Episc. Reatin.

Joannes Brady, Episc. Perten.

Felix Cantimorri, Episc. Parmen.

Petrus Paulus Trucchi, Episc. Forolivien.

Stephanus Marilley, Episc. Lausanen. et Geneven.

Guillelmus Massaja, Episc. Cassien.

Guillelmus Bernardus Ullathorne, Episc. Birminghamien.

Alexius Canoz, Episc. Tamassen.

Henricus Rossi, Episc. Casertan.

Joannes Baptista Pellei, Episc. Aquaependen.

Franciscus Mazzuoli, Episc. S. Severini.

Flavianus Abel Hugonin, Episc. Bajocen.

Philippus Mincione, Episc. Mileten.

Amadeus Rappe, Episc. Clevelanden.

Joannes Corti, Episc. Mantuanus.

Aloisius Ricci, Episc. Signin.

Jacobus Alipius Goold, Episc. Melbournen.

Eugenius Bruno Guiques, Episc. Outovien.

Guillelmus De Cany, Episc. Cargianen.

Paulus Dodmassei, Episc. Alexien.

Camillus Bisleti, Episc. Cornetan. et Centumcellar.

Thomas Mullock, Episc. S. Joannis Terrae Novas.

Maria Julianus, Episc. Diniensis.

Franciscus Gandolfi, Episc. Antipatren.

Joannes Antonius Balma, Episc. Ptolemaid.

Aloisius Kobes, Episc. Methonen.

Laurentius Guillelmus Renaldi, Episc. Pinerolien.

Joannes Maria Foulchier, Episc. Mimaten.

Rudesindus, Episc. Portus Victorias in Australia.

Antonius Boscarini, Episc. S. Angeli in Vado et Urbanien.

131

Januarius Acciardi, Episc. Anglonen. et Tursien.

Anionius De Stefano, Episc. Benden.

Guillelmus Keane, Episc. Cloynensis.

Antonius Felix Philibertus Dupanloup, Episc. Aureliancn.

Ludovicus Frauciscus Pie, Episc. Pictavien.

Livius Parlatore, Episc. S. Marci.

Ignatius Maria Silletti, Episc. Melphien et Rapollen.

Petrus Simon Dreux Breze, Epis. Moulinen.

Joannes Ranolder, Episc. Vesprimien,

Franciscus Petagna, Episc. Castri Maris.

Petrus Cirillus d'Urix y da Labairu, Episc. Bosnian, et

Sirmien.

Raphael Bachettoni, Episc. Compsan.
Georgius Strossmayer, Episc. Pampilouen. et Tudelen.
Georgius De Luca, Episc. Nursin.
Alexander Tache, Episc. S. Bonifacii,
Joannes Mac-Gill, Episc. Richmondien.
Hieronymus Verzeri, Episc. Brixien,
Petrus Lacarriere, Episc. jam Bassse Terras.
Ludovicus Theophilus Pallu du Pare, Episc. Blesen.
Philippus Fratellini, Episc. Forosempronien.
Aloisius Margarita, Episc. Oritan.
Joseph Arachial, Episc. Ancyran. Armen. rit.
Thomas Grant, Episc. Southwarcen.
Vincentius Bisceglia, Episc. Termular.
Mathias Augustinus Mengacci, P^pisc. Civitatis Castellan,

Hortan. et Gallesin.

Joannes Petrus Mabile, Episc. Versalien,
Cajetanus Brinciotti, Episc. Balneoregien.
Colinus Mac Kinnon, Episc. Arichateft.
Bernardus Pinol, Episc. de Nicaragua.
Ludovicus Eugenius Regnault, Episc. Carnuten,
Joannes Jacobus1 Guerrin, Episc. Lingonen.
Aloisius Sordo, Episc. Thelesin. seu Cerreten.
Bartholomseus B'Avanzo, Episc. Calven. et Theanen.
Joannes Joseph Longobardi, Episc. Andrien.
Joannes Petrus Bravard, Episc. Constantien.
Theodorus de Montpellier, Episc. Leodien,
Antonius La Scala, Episc. S. Severi.
Jesualdus Vitali, Episc. Ferentin.

I 2

132

Carolus Maria Dubuis, Episc. Galvestoiiieu.

Jacobus Stepischnegg, Episc. Lavantin.

Aloisius Filippi, Episc. Aquilan.

Jacobus Ginoulhial, Episc. Gratianopolitan.

Joseph Chaixal-y-Estrade, Episc. Urgellen.

Franciscus Joseph Rudiger, Episc. Lincien.

Joannes Loughlin, Episc. Brooklynien.

Thaddeus Amat, Episc. Monteregen.

Jacobus Roosevel Bayley, Episc. Nevarcen.

Ludovicus Goesbriand, Episc. Burlingtonen.

Emigdius Forchini, Episc. Civitatis Plebis.

Vincentius Materozzi, Episc. Ruben, et Bituntin.

Petrus Aloisius Speranza, Episc. Bergomen.

Thomas Michael Salzano, Episc. Tanen.

Felix Romano, Episc. Isclan.

Aloisius Landi Vittori, Episc. Assisien.

Vincentius Zubranich, Episc. Ragusin.

Benedictus Riccabona, Episc. Tridentin.

Ludovicus Forwerk, Episc. Leontopolitan.

Franciscus Antonius Maiorsini, Episcop. Lacedonien.

Thomas Michael Salzano, Episc. Tanen.

Innocentius Sannibale, Episc. Eugubin.

Nicolaus Renatus Sergent, Episc. Corosopiten.

Joannes Rosati, Episc. Tudertin.

Dominicus Zelo, Episc. Aversan.

Caietanus Rodilossi, Episc. Alatrin.

Franciscus Gallo, Episc. Abellinen.

Petrus Rota, Episc. Guastalien.

Joannes Joseph Vitezich, Episc. Veglien.

Franciscus Gianpaolo, Episc. Larinen.

Franciscus Roullet de La Bouillerie, Episc. Carcassonen.

Franciscus Paulus, Episcop. S. Agata? Gothorum.

Alexius Joseph Wicart, Episc. Vallis Vidonis.

Guillelmus Vaughan, Episc. Plymouth.

Nicolaus Pace, Episcop. Amerin.

Joannes Benini, Episc. Piscien.

Joseph Del Prete, Episc. Thyateren.

Joseph Formisano, Episc. Nolan.

Claudius Henricus Plantier, Episc. Nemausen.

Ludovicus Augustus Delalle, Episc. Ruthenen.

133

Vincentius Moretti, Episc. Imolen.

Antonius Joseph Jordany, Episc. Forojulien. et Toloneii.

Joannes Renier, Episcop. Feltr. et Bellunensis.

Patritius Moran, Episc. Dardanen.

Laurentius Gillooly, Episcop. Elphinensis.

Guillelmus Emmanuel, Episcop. Moguntinus.

Joannes Farrell, Episc. Hamiltonen.

Elias Ant. Alberani, Episc. Ascul. in Piceno.

Joannes Ghiureghian, Episc. Trapezuntin. Arm. rit.

Adrianus Languillat, Episc. Sergiopolitan.

Stephanus Semeria, Episc. Olympen.

Jacobus Bernardi, Episc. Massan.

Thomas Passero, Episc. Trojan.

Claudius Jacobus Boudinet, Episc. Ambianen.

Corradus Martin, Episc. Paterbonen.

Joseph Eraanuel Arroyo, Episc. De Guayana.

Joseph Romero, Episc. Dibonen.

Vincentius Cina, Episc. Adramiten.

Enricus, Episc. Casertanus.

Dalmatius Di Andrea, Episc. Bo\ren.

Vincentius Casser, Episc. Brixinen.

Philippus Vespasiani, Episc. Fanen.

Clemens Fares, Episc. Porphyrien.

Franciscus Marinelli, Episc. Porphyrien.

Henricus Juncker, Episc. Altonen.

Joannes Mac-Evilly, Episc. Galvien.

Guillelmus Clifford, Episc. Cliftonien.

Petrus Gerault De Langalerie, Episc. Bellicen.

Petrus Maria Ferre, Episc. Casalen.

Ludovicus Delcusy, Episc. Vivarien.

Petrus Buffetti, Episc. Brictinorien.

Joseph Stephanus Godelle, Episc. Thermopylen.

Jacobus Fridericus Wood, Episc. Philadelphien.

Joannes Baptista Scandella, Episc. Antinoen,

Joseph Targioni, Episc. Volaterran.

Aloisius Maria Paoletti, Episc. Montis Politiani.

Joseph De Los Rios, Episc. Lucen.

Michael O'Hea, Episc. Rossanen.

Patritius Lynch, Episc. Carolopolitan.

Joseph Maria Papardo, Episc. Sinopen.

134

Vitalis Justinus Grandin, Episc. Satalen.

Guillelmus Henricus Elder, Epis. Natchezensis.

Clemens Pagliari, Episc. Anagnin.

Fortunatus Maurizi, Episc. Verulan.

Petrus Sola, Episc. Nicien.

Ferdinandus Blanco, Episc. Abulen.

Paulus Benignus Carrion, Epis. De Porto Rico.

Jacobus Jeancard, Episc. Ceramen.

Carolus Joannes Fillion, Episc. Cenomanen.

Joannes Sebastianus Devoucoux, Episc. Ebroicen.

Ignatius Senestrey, Epise. Ratisbonen.

Riccardus Roskell, Episc. Nottinghamen.

Paschalis Vuicic, Episc. Antiphellen.

Ludovicus Ideo, Episc. Liparen.

Michael Paya y Rico, Episc. Conchen.

Jacobus Etheridge, Episc. Toronen.

Petrus Cubero y Lopez de Padilla, Episc. Oriolen.

Domiuicus Fanelli, Episc. Dianen.

Joachim Lluch, Epis. Canarien. et S. Christophori in Laguna.

Ignatius Papardo, Episc. Miden.

Joannes Antonius Augustus, Episc. Apamien.

Petrus Tilkian, Episc. Brussen. Arm. rit.

Antonius Maria Valenziani, Episc. Fabrianen. et Mathelicen.

Hyacinthus Luzi, Episc. Narnien.

Thomas Grace, Episc. S. Pauli de Minesota.

Antonius Halagi, Episc. Artuinen. Arm. rit.

Joseph Teta, Episc. Oppiden.

Joannes Baptista Siciliani, Episc. Caputaquen. et Vallen.

Franciscus Xaverius D'Ambrosio, Episc. Muran.

Michael Milella, Episc. Aprutin.

Rodesindus Salvado, Episc. Victorien.

Simon Spilotros, Episc. Tricaricen.

Felix Petrus Fruchaud, Episc. Limovicen.

Aloisius Maria Epivent, Episc. Aturen.

Joseph Lopez-Crespo, Episc. Santanderien.

Vincentius Arbelaes, Episc. Maximopolitanus.

Joannes Quinlan, Episc. Mobilien.

Petrus Joseph Tordoya, Episc. Tiberiopolitan.

Joannes Monetti, Epise. Cervien.

Alexpoider Paulus Spoglia, Episc. Comaclen.

135

Aloisius Mariotti, Episc. Feretran.

Valerius Laspro, Episc. Gallipolitan.

Aloisius Lembo, Episc. Cotroiien.

Jacobus Rogers, Episc. Chatamen.

Patritius Dorrian, Epise. Danen. et Connoren.

Andreas Ignatius Schaepman, Episc. Esbonen.

Alexander Bonnaz, Episc. Csanadiensis.

Sebastianus Dias Larangeira, Episc. S. Petri Flum. Granden.

Michael Domenec, Episc. Pittsburgen.

Aloisius Antonius Dos Santos, Episc. Fortalexien.

Antonius de Macedo (Sosta, Episc. Belem de Para.

Walterus Steins, Episc. Niiopolitan.

Claudius Maria Magnin, Episc. Annecien.

Julius Ravinet, Episc. Trecen.

Antonius de Trinitate de Vasconcellos Pereira de Mello, Episc

Laraacen.

Jacobus Donnelly, Episc. Clogherien.
Gerardus Petrus Wilmer, Episc. Heiiemen.
Georgius Buttler, Epis. Limericen.
Carolus Theodorus Colet, Episc. Lu9onen.
Eustachius Zanoli, Episc. Eleutheropolitan.
Fridericus Maria Zinelli, Episc. Tarvisin.
Aloisius De Canossa, Episc. Veronen.
Robertus Cornthwaite, Episc. Beverlacen.
Benedictus Vilamitiana, Episc. Derthusen.
Petrus Maria Lagiiera y Menezo, Episc. Oxaraen.
Callistus Castrillo y Ornedo, Episc. Legionen.
Silvester Horton Roseerans, Episc. Pompejopolitan.
Victor Felix Bernardon, Episc. Vapincen.
Augustinus David, Episc. Briocen.
Ludovicus Nogret, Episc. S. Claudii.
Antonius Boutonnet, Episc. Guadalupen,
Pantaleo Monserrat y Navarro, Episc. Barcinonen.
Joseph Fessler, Episc. S. Hippolyti.
Marianus Puigllat-y-Amigo, Episc. Illerden.
Constantinus Bonet, Episc. Gerunden.
Joannes de Franca Castro e Moura, Episc. Portugallien.
Joannes Gray, Episc. Hypsopolitan.

Bernardinus Trionfetti, Episc. Terracinen. Privernen. et Setin.
Franciscus Gainza, Episc. De Caceres.

136

Antonius Alves Martins, Episc. Visen.

Joseph Papp-Szilagyi de Illesfalva, Episc. Magno Varadinen.

Grace. Rum.

Gioannichius, Episc. Palmiren. Greco-Cath.
Joannes Petrus, Episc. Costantien.
Joannes Jacovacci, Episc. Erythrensis.
Joannes Baptista Greith, Episc. S. Galli.
Nicolaus Conaty, Episc. Kilmoren.
Nicolaus Adames, Episc. Halicarnassen.
Fidelis Abbati, Episc. Sanctorinen.
Joannes Baptista Gazailhan, Episc. jam Veneten.
Antonius Monastyrski, Episc. Premislieu.
Joannes Zaffron, Episc. Sebenicen.
Joseph Nicolaus Dabert, Episc. Petrocoricen.
Petrus Marcus Le Breton, Episc. Anicien.
Joannes Claudius Lachat, Episcopus Basileen.
Joseph Pluym, Episc. Nicopolitan.
Felix Maria Arriete, Episc. Gatitan, et Septen.
Franciscus Audreoli, Episc. Callien et Pergulan.
Paulus Micaleff, Episcopus Civitatis Castelli.
Antonius Maria Pettinari, Episc. Nucerin.
Joannes Petrus Dours, Episcopus Suessionen.
Gregorius Lopez, Episc. Placentin. Compostellen.
Joseph Aloisius Montagut, Episc. Ovoten.
Joachim Hernandez y Herrero, Episc. Segobricen.
Paulus Beriscia, Episc. Pulaten.
Joannes Strain, Episc. Abilen.
Edmundus Franciscus Guierry, Episc. Danaben.
Hyacinthus Vera, Episc. Megaren.
Caspar Mermillod, Episc. Hebronen.
Angelus Kraljevic, Episc. Metellopolitan.
Agapitus Dumani, Episc. Ptolemaiden. Graec. rit. Melchitar.
Thomas Nulty, Episcopus Midensis.
Joseph Salandari, Episc. Marcopolitan.
Franciscus Nicolaus Gueullette, Episc. Valentinen.
Guillelmus Renatus Meignan, Episc. Catalaunen.
Stephanus Ramadie, Episc. Elnen.
Raimundus Garcia y Anton, Episc. Tuden.
Hyacinthus Maria Martinez, Episc. S. Christophori de

Havana.

137

Henricus Franciscus Bracq, Epis. Gandaven.

Nicolaus Power, Episc. Sareptan.

Laurentius Bonaventura Shiel, Epis. Adelaidopolitan.

Aloisius Riccio, Episc. Cajacien.

Ferdinandus Ramirez y Vazquez, Episc. Pacen.

Victor Augustus Dechamps, Episc. Namurcen.

Joannes Joseph Conroj, Episc. Albanen. in America.

Joannes Marango, Episc. Tliinen et Miconen.

Raphael Popow, Episc. Bulgaror.

Nicolaus Frangipani, Episc. Concordien. electus.

Joseph Romeo, Episc. Dibonen.

Joannes Lozano, Episc. Palentin.

Antonius Jorda y Soler, Episc. Vicen.

Agabius Biscia, Episc. Cariopolitan.

Stephanus Melchisedechian, Episc. Erzerumien. Armen. rit.

Carolus Philippus Place, Episc. Marsilien.

Joannes Baptista Lequette, Episc. Atrebaten.

Petrus Alfredus Grimardias, Episc. Cadurcen.

Joannes Maria BeceL Episc. Veneten.

Georgius Dubocowich, Episc. Pharen.

Jacobus Lynch, Episc. Arcadiopolitan.

Joseph De la Cuesta y Maroto, Episc. Aurien.

Jacobus Chadwick, Episc. Hagulstadeus. et Novo Castrens.

Angelas Di Pietro, Episc. Nyssen.

Joseph Aggarbati, Episc. Senogallien.

Joseph Bovieri, Episc. Montis Falisci.

Julius Lenti, Episc. Sutrin, et Nepesin.

Thomas Gallucci, Episc. Recineten. et Lauretan.

Joannes Baptista Cerruti, Episc. Savonen. et Naulen.

Salvator Angelus Dernartis, Episc. Galtellen. Noren.

Philippus Manetti, Episc. Tripolitan.

Conceptus Focaccetti, Episc. Lystren.

Anselmus Fauli, Episc. Grossetan.

Joseph Rosati, Episc. Lunen.-Sarzanen.

Josephus Giusti, Episc. Aretinus.

Carolus Macchi, Episc. Regien.

Joannes Zalka, Episc. Jaurinensis.

Cajetanus Franceschini, Episc. Maceraten. et Tolentin.

Antonius Fania, Episc. Marsicen. et Potentien.

Andreas Formica, Episc. Cuneen.

138

Carolus Savio, Episc. Asteii.

Laurentius Gastaldi, Episc. Salutiar.

Eugenius Galletti, Episc. Alba Pampejen.

Antonius Colli, Episc. Alexandrin. Pedemontan.

Augustinus Hacquard, Episc. Verdunen.

Joseph Alphredus Faulon, Episc. Nanceyen. et Tullen.

Henricus Bindi, Episc. Pistorien.

Antonius Grech Delicata Testaferrata, Episc. Calydonien.

electus.

Franciscus Zunnui, Episc. Exellen. et Terralben.
Petrus Georgius Di Natale, Episc. Amiden. Chaldaeor.
Leo, Episc. Rupellensis et Santonensis.
Franciscus Gros, Episc. Tarantasiensis.

Joannes Chrysostomus Kruesz, Archiabbas O. S. B. S. Martini.
Guillelmus de Cesere, Abbas Montis Virginis.

139

IV.

VENERABILES FRATRES

Perjucunda quidem, licet a fide et devotione vestra prorsus
expectanda, Nobis fuerat nobilis ilia concordia, qua, sejuncti ac
dissiti, eadem tenere, eadem asserere profitebamini, quae Nos
docueramus, et eosdem, quos damnaveramus, errores in religiosae
civilisque societatis exitium invectos execrari. Verum multo
jucundius Nobis fuit haec ipsa discere ex ore vestro, et nunc rursum
a congregatis vobis explicatius et solemnius accipere ; dura iis
amoris et obsequii officiis Nos cumulatis, quae mentes affectusque
vestros luculentius verbis ipsis aperiant.

Cur nam enim tarn prono animo obsecundastis desiderio Nostro,
omnique incommodo posthabito, ad Nos e toto terrarum orbe con-
volastis? Scilicet explorata vobis erat firmitas Petra3, supra
quam aedificata fuit Ecclesia, perspecta vivifica ejus virtus; nee
vos fugiebat, quam pra3clarum utrique rei testimonium accedat
a Christianorum heroum Canonizatione. Duplex igitur hoc
festum celebraturi confluxistis, non modo ut sacris hisce solemniis
splendorem adderetis, sed ut, universam veluti fidelium familiam
referentes, praesentia vestra non minus, quam diserta professione
testaremini, eamdem nunc, quas duodeviginti ab hinc-sasculis, vigere
fidem, idem caritatis vinculum omnes nectere, eamdem virtutem
exeri ab hac Cathedra veritatis.

Placuit vobis commendare pastoralem sollicitudinem Nostram,
et quidquid pro viribus agimus ad effundendam veritatis lucem,
ad disjiciendas errorum tenebras, ad perniciem depellendam ab
animabus Christi sanguine redemptis ; nempe ut econjuuctis pro-
priorum magistrorum eententiis ac vocibus, confirmentur Chris-
tianas gentes in obsequio et amore erga hanc sanctam Sedem, in
eamque acrius mentis oculos intendant. Corrogatis undique sub-
sidiis hue convenistis civilem Nostrum sustentaturi Principatum
tanta oppugnatum perfidia : ideo sane ut splendidissimo hoc facto,

140

et per collata Catholic! orbis suffragia necessitatem ejus ad liberum
Ecclesise regimen assereretis.

Dilectum vero populum Romanum, indubiaque et clarissima
ejus obsequii in Nos et dilectionis indicia meritis laudibus prose-
quenda duxistis ; quo et alacriores ipsi adjiceretis animos, et eum
vindicaretis a conflatis in ipsum calumniis, et fcedam illis sacri-
legaa proditionis notam inureretis, qui, felicitatis populi obtentu,
Romanum Pontificem e solio deturbare conantur.

Et dum arctioribus mutual caritatis nexibus per hunc conven-
tum obstringere studuistis omnes orbis Ecclesias, hoc etiam prae-
stitistis, ut uberiore evangelico spiritu repleti ad Beatissimi Petri
Principis Apostolorum et Pauli doctoris gentium cineres fbrtiores
inde discederetis ad perrumpendas hostium phalanges, ad tuenda
religionis jura, ad unitatis studium creditis plebibus efficacius
ingerendum.

Quod sane votum apertius etiam se prodit in eo communi Con-
cilii cecumenici desiderio, quod omnes non modo perutile sed et
necessarium arbitramini. Superbia enim humana, veterem ausum
instauratura, jamdiu per commentitium progressum civitatem et
turrim extruere nititur, cujus culmen pertingat ad crelum, unde
demurn Deus ipse detrahi possit. At Is descendisse videtur in-
specturus opus, et a3dificantum linguas ita confusurus, ut non
audiat unusquisque vocem proximi sui : id enim animo objiciant
Ecclesiae vexationes, miseranda civilis consortii conditio, pertur-
batio rerum omnium, in qua versamur.

Cui sane gravissirnse calamitati sola certe objici potest divina
Ecclesiae virtus, quae tune maxime so prodit, cum Episcopi a
Summo Pontifice convocati, eo praeside, conveniunt in nomine
Domini de Ecclesiae rebus acturi. Et gaudemus omnino, praever-
tisse vos hac in re propositum jamdiu a Nobis conceptual com-
mendandi sacrum hunc costum ejus patrocinio, cujus pedi a rerum
exordio serpentis caput subjectum fuit, quaeque deinde universas
haereses sola interemit. Satisfacturi propterea communi desiderio
jam mine nunciamus, futurum quandocumque Concilium sub
auspiciis Deiparas Virginis ab omni labe immunis esse constituen-
dum, et eo aperiendum die, quo insignis hujus privilegii ipsi
collati memoria recolitur.

Faxit Deus, faxit Immaculata Virgo, ut amplissimos e saluber-
rimo isto consilio fructus percipere valeamus. Interim vero Ipsa
validissimo sutfragio suo praasentibus necessarian! adjunctis opem

141

Nobis imploret. Deusque ejus precibus exoratus misericordise sua3
divitias in Nos universamque Ecclesiam effundat. Nos certe
amantissimi gratissimique animi sensu non extinguendo compulsi,
enixe vobis adprecamur a Deo quidquid spiritual! emolumento
vestro, quidquid plebium vobis commissarum provectui, quidquid
religionis et justitias tutelar, quidquid civilis societatis tranquilli-
tati bene vertere possit.

Et quoniam aliquot e vobis a peculiaribus populorum su< rum
necessitatibus coactos, citius anobis discessurosesse comperimus ;
iis, si temporis angustias singulos nobis complecti non sinant, in
pra3sentiarum omnia ominamur secunda, et effuso cordis affectu
bene precamur. Universis vero supernorum omnium bonorum
copiosiquediviniauxiliiauspicem,simulquepra3cipua3 benevolently
Nostras et grati animi testem, Benedictionem Apostolicam ex imo
pectore depromptam peramanter impertimus.

LONDON

PRINTED BY SPOTTI SWOODE AND CO.
NEW-STEEET SQTTAEB

THE (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

AND THE

INFALLIBILITY OF THE BOMAN PONTIFF:

A PASTORAL LETTER TO THE CLERGY

&c.

HENRY EDWARD

AKCHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER.

SECOND EDITION.

LONDON:

LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.

1869.

LONDON : PRINTED BY

8POTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.

Effect of the Council already felt in England and in France, p. 5.

CHAPTER II.

On the opportuneness of defining the Infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff, p. 25.

Reasons against the definition, 28 ; Answers to reasons against
the definition, 33 ; Reasons for the definition, 38.

CHAPTER III.

Tradition of the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, p. 58.
Statement of the doctrine, 58.

1. Tradition from the Council of Constance to the Council of
Chalcedon, 70.

Gerson, 70 ; Bishops of France, 71 ; University of Paris, 72 ;
Stephen, Bishop of Paris, 73 ; Bradwardine, Archbishop of Can-
terbury, 73 ; Clement VI., 74 ; S. Thomas, 74 ; S. Bonaventure,
75 ; Council of Lyons, 75 ; S. Thomas of Canterbury, 77 ; S. An-
selm, 77 ; S. Bernard, 78 ; Anselm of Havelburgh, 78 ; Synod of
Quedlinburgh, 80 ; Council of Rome, 81 ; Eighth General Coun-
cil, 81 ; Alcuin and Caroline Books, 81 ; Bishops of Africa, 83 ;
Sixth General Council, 84 ; Formula of Hormisdas, 85 ; S. Leo,
and Council of Chalcedon, 87.

2. Tradition from the Council of Constance to 1682, 93.
Opinions of Gerson, 96 ; Condemnation of Peter de Osma, 99 ;

Faculty of Louvain, 99 ; Clergy of France, 101.

3. First formal enunciation of Gallicanism, 107.

Assembly of 1682, 107; Nomination by the King, 109; Re-
sistance of the Sorbonne and other Faculties to the Four Articles
110.

CHAPTER IV.

Two effects of the Council certain, p. 124.

Effect on the evidence and proposition of the Faith, 124 ; and
on the relations of the Civil Governments to the Church, 127.

POSTSCRIPT. Monseigneur Maretj l Du Concile General et de la Paix
ReligieuseJ p. 139.

CHAPTER I.

REVEREND AND DEAR BRETHREN,

In publishing, on the 27th of last May, the
Apostolic Letters which direct us to invoke, in every
Mass, the light of the Holy Ghost for the guidance of
the coming (Ecumenical Council, I refrained from
adding any words of my own. But as the time now
draws near when it will be my duty to leave you for
a season, it seems fitting, and you may perhaps
expect, that I should freely express to you the
thoughts awakened by this event, and the intentions
for which we ought to pray.

It has been said again and again, by those who
desire what they say to be true, that the indiction of
a General Council in ages past stirred the whole
world, but in these days is received with complete
indifference. If it be so, then the need of a General
Council is proved, and the reason for convoking it
is evident. If the Christian world be in a state of
coma, it is time that the physicians should consult
together. But is it the fact that the coming Council
is ignored? What event in the last two years has
excited so much attention? In what country of the
Christian world has it been passed over in silence?

What Government has not occupied itself about it?
There have been interpellations in legislatures,,
diplomatic circulars, hundreds of articles in a thou-
sand journals in all countries of Europe, speeches in
convocations, books, pamphlets, and letters in news-
papers from the invited and the uninvited, an uni-
versal stir and excitement, not indeed within the
unity of the Catholic Church, where all is calm in
the strength of quiet and of confidence, but outside,,
in the political and religious world. The diagnosis
of the case is, therefore, hardly correct. The patient
is not insensible, but highly sensitive ; lethargic at
times, perhaps, and unconscious of the extent of his
maladies, but fully alive to what is passing around
him and impending over him in the future. It i&
true, indeed, that the indiction of the Council of
Trent, for example, fell upon the conscience of
Christian Europe while as yet it was visibly united
to the Holy See. The errors of the so-called
Keformation were already in activity, and the minds
of men were deeply moved by many passions. Most
of the Civil Powers of Europe were then Catholic, and
had therefore a large participation in the Council.
Now all is changed. Half of Germany, Norway,
Sweden, Denmark, England and Scotland, have ceased
to be Catholic. The Civil Powers in countries of
which the people remain wholly or almost altogether
Catholic, are so no longer. It is not to be ex-
pected that they will be moved by hope or by fear,
by good or by ill will towards the Council in which
they have foregone their share. Nevertheless, even
among them, both in public and in private, the

coming Council already exerts an influence which is
ever increasing in strength and in significance.

So true is this, that the question, who have or
have not been invited, or who have or have not a
right to sit in the Council, has been raised by many
who are not of the unity of the Catholic Church.
We should have thought that this question would
solve itself. The convocation of Parliament is
addressed only to its members, and its members are
those only who are subjects of the Crown and are
duly invested with the right to sit. The indiction
of the Council is addressed to the Bishops of the
Catholic Unity, who are subject to the authority of
the Church, and members of its world- wide empire.
By the Bull of Indiction all Bishops are, not in
vited, but obliged to attend. It is not an invitation,
but a citation. They can be released from the obli-
gation to appear only by the Supreme Authority
which imposes it. It has been erroneously imagined
that the two Apostolic Letters addressed, the first,
to the Schismatical Bishops of the East, and the
second, to all Protestants and others not Catholic,
were issued to give an (Ecumenical character to the
Council. But this is a transparent error. The Coun-
cil, by containing either numerically or morally the
Pastors of the whole Flock throughout the world,
subject to the Apostolic See, is thereby, ipso facto,
(Ecumenical. These two letters, therefore, were
addressed in paternal charity to those who once were,
and now unhappily are no longer, of the Catholic
Unity. Their presence is not needed to make the
Council (Ecumenical. They are exhorted to avail

themselves of the moment of reconciliation and of
peace offered by the assembling of the Council; and
all alike on one and the same condition, namely, a
recognition and submission to the Divine Authority
of the Catholic and Roman Church, by which the
Council will assemble, deliberate, and make decrees.
They who have the Episcopal character validly im-
pressed by undoubted consecration would, upon
submission to the Divine Authority of the Church, be
admitted to sit with the Episcopate of the Catholic
world. The invitation therefore is, first, to recon-
ciliation, and then to verification of their episcopal
character. The Bishops of the Churches in the East,
now in separation from the Catholic Church, are
without doubt, for the most part, validly consecrated.
They might, upon the renunciation of schism and any
doctrinal error, at once be restored to their rank as
Bishops. There are others in the West claiming
the episcopal character, and claiming likewise to
be Catholic, as the Jansenists of the Low Coun-
tries, and others again nearer home. If they
believe their episcopal character to be unjustly
doubted or denied, the way is open for examination
and redress. It is not for me to say what the
Supreme Authority may or may not see fit to do.
But this, at least, I may venture to say, for
this the Supreme Authority has already done.
It has invited all those who are now separate from
its unity to avail themselves of this occasion. Let
them bring before the coming Council any cause in
which they have been wronged; any claims which
have not yet been heard, any alleged rights of which

they have been deprived. Three hundred years of
contention, misery, and declining faith — not to go
deeper into the dark memories of the past — may well
turn the hearts of men once more to the Church in
which their forefathers believed and died. God is not
glorified by divisions, nor is our Divine Master hon-
oured by contradictions among those who teach in His
name. Let us hope, pray, and labour for unity in
the truth. There are many signs of the times which
betoken a happier day. Not to go further back than
the last forty years, there has come over England a
change which may be felt. A distinguished French
writer has said that in the midst of the old England
which is passing away, a new England is arising.
The England of penal laws, and slavery, and unequal
legislation is gone; the England of to-day has eman-
cipated men from religious penalties, abolished
slavery, and given equal laws to the people of these
realms. This new England of to-day, with all its
maladies — and they are indeed grievous and menacing,
inherited from the sins of our forefathers — is, never-
theless, just, fair, merciful, and generous. There is a
benevolence growing up where once was ill-will ; and
a reaction has set in towards those who have been
wronged and falsely accused. Of this, evidence is on
every side, in private and in public life ; and this will
have results hereafter which the most sanguine now
do not venture to express. There may, perhaps, be
found here and there some half-educated minds, or
some interested and violent persons, who keep up the
old rail against the Catholic religion. But the English
people do not now believe you and me to be idolaters.

Twenty years ago many did so. But the light of
day, and their own good sense, has destroyed this
superstition. They know us to believe in many
mysteries of the supernatural order; but they pro-
fess to believe in supernatural mysteries themselves.
They cannot call us superstitious or credulous, with-
out accepting the name themselves. They are coming
also to see that the supernatural order needs a more
solid and stable foundation than they can find in the
midst of their many contradictions ; they see that at
last they are compelled in argument to rest upon the
witness and testimony of Christendom. But for
whom does Christendom bear its witness ? The day is
past for appeals to antiquity. If Christianity and
the Christian Scriptures are to be maintained in con-
troversy against sceptical criticism, the unbroken,
world-wide witness of the Catholic Church must be
invoked. This consciousness of dependence has
worked like a benign influence upon the minds of
those who believe Christianity to be a divine revela-
tion, and the books of Scripture to be inspired. And
I joyfully bear witness that a pious belief in these
two divine truths pervades the English people. In
saying this I do not forget the materialism, ignorance,
indifference, practical atheism of millions. Never-
theless the Christian tradition of England, though
grievously mutilated and robbed of its divine au-
thority, still survives. There are in the Anglican
communion, and among Nonconformists, millions who
believe in Jesus Christ, His person and His redemp-
tion, with a heartfelt and loving faith; and their
faith bears noble fruits. Many of their errors

come from a jealousy for these very truths. It
was a master-stroke of the enemy of truth to make
them reject the words and the will of Jesus Christ
out of jealousy for His Person and His work. As
they who killed His disciples believed they were
doing a service to God, so they rejected the unity
and authority of His Church and sacraments or-
dained by Him, and doctrines which came from His
lips, in the belief that they were thereby honouring
His Person and His truth. But this illusion of the
Evil One has been at last found out. Fair and
truthful minds acknowledge at this day that every
truth for which they profess to be jealous is menaced,
and in a multitude of minds altogether lost. But
they cannot deny that in the Catholic Church these
very truths are not lost or menaced, but universally
taught and believed in all fulness and precision. The
mission and work of the Catholic Church in England
is like that of S. Paul in Corinth. In the midst of
a highly civilised, intellectual, luxurious, refined,
philosophical, and contentious race, he preached
c Jesus Christ and Him crucified/ Some asked for
signs and others for wisdom ; some were incredulous,
others were critical ; they sought after learning, elo-
quence, logic : he preached, affirmed, and re-affirmed
again, as one having authority, sustained by a con-
sciousness of a mission and a message both alike
divine. Men chafed against both the matter and
the manner, and against the manner even more than
the matter of his teaching. It was perpetual affirma-
tion. They would not see that his divine authority
was a part of his message, and that the divine cer-

tainty of what he taught was the foundation of that
authority ; that their 4 faith might not stand on the
wisdom of man, but on the power of God.' * If the
people of England indeed believe in c Jesus Christ
and Him crucified/ we shall soon see the unity of faith
arising out of our endless confusions : for to believe
in Him we must know who He is, that is, that He
is God, consubstantial, co-eternal, co-equal with the
Father and the Holy Ghost, therefore we must
know the Holy Trinity, One God in three persons;
and His Manhood, therefore His Incarnation, two
perfect natures in One Divine Person, and thereby
also the dignity of His blessed Mother as Mother
of God. We must believe also what He has done
for us, that is, the redemption by His most pre-
cious blood; what He has taught us, or the whole
undiminished truth which He has revealed; and
what He has commanded us, or all the institu-
tions and obligations of His moral and positive law.
All these four assemblages of truth are contained in
the knowledge of ' Jesus Christ and Him crucified.7
No one can be said to know Him who does not know
who He is, what He has done, what He has taught,
what He has commanded; but no one can know
these things who does not know the doctrine of the
Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the whole doctrine of
faith, the whole order of the Church, its unity and
authority, the institution of the Holy Sacraments,
with all the grace they convey and the obligations
they impose. But this is to know the Catholic Faith
and the Catholic Church; and as men become once

* 1 Cor. ii. 5.

more calm and candid, as the storms and passions of
three hundred years subside, they will see that in
their haste and illusions they have wounded Him
whom they professed to honour, and have destroyed
His work whom they have desired to serve.

For the last thirty years there has been an awaken-
ing in the mind of England, such as, for three hundred
years, has never been before. There is a sense of loss
and of privation, an honest acknowledgment of the
evil done by the so-called reformers ; a desire to
restore what has been broken down ; a painful con-
sciousness of division, contention, and uncertainty;
a conviction that these things are contrary to the
will and commandment of our Divine Master : an
aspiration after unity, a hunger for truth, a longing
after the return of the Divine Presence which once
dwelt in the old churches of England. Besides this,
there is a consciousness that the Church of Christ
cannot be cribbed up within four seas ; that it fills
the world, and that the insular Christianity of
England, even if it were perfectly united in itself,
could not live long when disunited from the Christian
world. The spread of the British Empire, and the
spread of Anglicanism to the colonies, has still more
powerfully awakened this aspiration for a higher
unity. Wheresoever the insular religion of England
goes, it finds a Church and a Faith before it, which
contains islands and continents, and the whole world,
in its unbroken unity. The colonies of Great Britain
are acting powerfully, both in politics and religion,
on the mother country. They both give and receive
an influence which will deeply modify and assimilate

the whole British Empire to a type, not of the past,
but of the future. The mother country has impressed
its outlines upon the colonies ; the colonies are now
silently but surely transforming the mother country
into their own likeness. But neither will ultimately
prevail. Another image and likeness is returning
upon both. The great principles, axioms, and maxims
of our English law, derived from Catholic times and
from the Catholic Church, lie imperishable at the
foundation of our political order. They have been
carried throughout our colonies, and have reproduced
in all our dependencies a political and social life
homogeneous to our own. This unity of first prin-
ciples would seem to promise for the British Empire a
future of solidity and endurance, if only the insular
narrowness of England be wisely effaced. The Tudor
legislation in religion, which for three hundred
years has afflicted England and persecuted Ireland,
has never been able to establish itself in our colonies.
There, the Catholic Church has been always freer
than it is even now in England and in Ireland. The
abolition of the Tudor statutes is as certain as the
rising of the sun to-morrow. In Ireland it is already
done. In England it will not long tarry. A larger
and more living spirit of justice and charity is burst-
ing the bands which human violence imposed upon
the liberty of divine faith. In this our colonies led
the way, and the mother country must inevitably
follow. We have seemed to be paradoxical and pro-
voking when we say that S. Thomas of Canterbury is
regaining his hold on the hearts of Englishmen.
But it is emphatically true. He died for the liberties

of the Church ; and the liberties of the Church, how-
soever they may be embodied in some particular
cause in debate, resolve themselves ultimately and
necessarily into these two principles, or axioms of
faith : the one, that no human authority whatsoever of
kings, princes, legislatures, or human laws may come
between the soul and God ; the other, that this perfect
liberty of the soul in faith is derived from God, and
has for its witness, guide and guardian, the Divine
Authority of His Church. The English people have
long professed the former of these truths. Even the
established religion, the whole history of which is at
variance with this principle, perpetually asserts it.
One half of the English people have vindicated it by
suffering under penal laws, unto bonds and death*
It is this profound conviction which has helped tc
abolish the State Church in Ireland. The accumulated
action of the colonies, of Ireland, and of half the popu-
lation of Great Britain, will inevitably, and before long,
abolish the state religion in England. The British
Empire then, both in its political and its religious
life, will have burst its bands, and will reconstitute
itself upon a wider base than the area of our four seas.
What faith, and what unity then, will be commensu-
rate to such an empire, it is not difficult to foresee
Even the Russian despotism is powerless to maintain
the unity of the Greek Church. Half the Russian
population dissents from the established religion. If
liberty of faith were granted, no church would long
stand but that which is the fountain, guide and guar-
dian, of the liberty of faith. To manifest this to the
world, the Divine Head of the Church seems so to order

its destinies that the two chief fields of its power and
expansion should be the British Empire and the United
States. In these two vast spheres of intense intel-
lectual activity and vehement energy of will, an epis-
copate of a hundred and seventy Bishops rules over
missionary churches the most united, vigorous, and
prolific to be found in the whole world. I do not
know how others may have regarded the assembly of
the Anglican Bishops of England and America two
years ago. Something may indeed have invited the
criticism as much of their own flocks as of others.
But to me it was a subject of hope. It was an ex-
plicit evidence of the desire for unity which is work-
ing in various ways on every side. They, no doubt,
desired to confine that union within their own
system ; but they felt that the insular narrowness of
England is not enough. They invited America and
the colonies to bear a part. This alone proved a
wider desire and a higher aspiration, which such an
assembly can never satisfy. It gave a great impulse
to those who have been praying for reunion. They
do not fear to declare that America and Australia
are not enough without Catholic Europe; and that
even Constantinople is not enough without Rome.
These ideas have been scattered broadcast ; and where
they have lighted they have infused desires and
prayers in myriads of hearts up and down in England
and throughout the Anglican system, which nothing
can extinguish, nothing can stay. They will work
on in silence with a potency which is not of man only,
preparing for a time when those who are separate from
the only unity of Divine foundation will be irresist-
ibly absorbed by its supernatural power and grace.

It is certain, then, that in England the indiction of
a General Council has come at a time when the
minds of men are specially prepared for it. Even if
they had been silent, their silence would not have
been the silence of indifference. But there has been
no silence. Both in public and in private, by word
and by writing, an interest serious and respectful has
been shown.

But in this country the interest felt about the
Council is chiefly, if not altogether, in its bearing
upon religion. In France, besides this, perhaps the
43hief interest arises from its bearing upon politics.
The debate in the Corps Legislatif in July of last
year shows how profoundly the minds, not of Catho-
lics only, but of mere politicians, are moved by the
anticipations of what the Council may decree. In a
moment of haste and precipitation, some French
writers and politicians have interpreted the condem-
nations in the Syllabus as a condemnation of the
principles of 1789. This is enough to rouse a great
turmoil. But is it well to take for granted, and to
make us who are at a distance believe, that the
principles of 1789 are such as the theology and the
morality of the Christian Church must condemn ? We
would desire to believe, if we can, that those principles,
even if they bear the marks of a period of excitement
rather than of calm and measured thought, are never-
theless in some way reconcilable with the great laws
of political morality which lie at the foundations of
human society, and are consecrated by the sanction
of the Christian world. I should be sorry to believe
that there is anything indelibly impressed on the

political order of the great French people which is
at variance with the intellectual and moral system
of the Catholic Church.

In touching on this point, so dear to that illustrious
nation, as hereafter in touching once more on another
subject, relating to the history of 1682, I shall refrain
as far as possible from using language of my own,
lest unconsciously I should do, what a French writer
has lately, unreasonably I think, and without cause
imputed to me ; that is, in any way wound ever so
lightly the dignity of France. I shall in both
cases use the words of devoted and distinguished
sons of that great people. The Prince de Broglie, in
treating of the variance between the Church and
modern society, which is so sedulously preached by
those who desire to exclude the Church from the
political order, says that the Catholic Church has
stood in relations with civil society these eighteen
hundred years in all lands: 'from Constantine to
Charlemagne, from Charlemagne to Charles V., from
Charles V. to Louis XIV., from Louis XIV. to
1789.' 'Why, then, should there be one only date,
1789, when this spirit of adaptation in Christianity
has failed, and one only society which is bound to
divorce Christianity on account of incompatibility of
temper ? . . . In reflecting on this singular fact,
which is the great problem of our times, I can only
find one cause to assign, namely, the abstract and
philosophical character which society in France, by
the organ of its legislators since 1789, has always
affected to give to the principles on which it is
constituted.' 'France,' he adds, 'is the only nation

which has undertaken the generous but adventurous
task to labour " not for one nation in particular, but
for all the human race ; not for one time, but for all
times." c The only thing I shall permit myself to
say is, that it is this philosophical character, impressed
on all our laws, which has passed also into our
manners and our language, that brings with it a
complication, until now without example in the
relations of a State, and of a society, with the Chris-
tian religion, and even with any religion whatsoever.'
c To recognise the principles of 1789 with the cha-
racter of universal obligation which they affect, is to
add an appendix to the Catechism, and ten or twelve
articles to the Creed/ c The French Revolution in
making itself philosopher, metaphysician, and almost
theologian, has entered upon the territory of the
spiritual. It is a Church which it opposes to the
Church, and a new Catholicism which it desires to
substitute for, or associate with, the old. A concordat
is not enough ; many a Council would be necessary to
complete such an operation. Such is, to my mind,
the true point of difference between society in France
and the Church. It does not limit itself, as all its
predecessors, to demanding of the faithful and of
their pastors to pay the taxes, observe the laws,
lend their aid to the regular action of public func-
tions : it exacts of them on points of doctrine, such as
the origin of sovereignty, the liberty of thought, the
natural equality of man, a veritable profession of
faith, accompanied by an amende honorable for all
adhesion, in other places and at other times, to doc-
trines contrary to itself.' c It is not very surprising

that a great institution, which has charge of souls in
all the world, should hesitate to commit itself to a
symbol of ideas so wanting in precision as to lend
itself in fifty years to the Constitution of '91, the
Charter of 1830, and to the Plebiscite of 1862.'

He then points out the ambiguity and uncertainty
of a document which may be interpreted in four or
five ways. ' Is it indeed the same principle which
adapts itself to two interpretations so contrary to
each other? In the matter of religious liberty, how
many commentaries have we not had? There is the
administrative interpretation, which recognises no
other worships than those of which the State pays
the heads, and fixes the legal status. . . . There is
the liberal interpretation, which is much more respect-
ful to the rights of individuals. . . . There is the
revolutionary interpretation, which gives free course
to all aberrations of thought. ... So many schools
are there, all sheltering under the common name of
liberty of thought, of which the doctors and disciples,
intolerant enough for each other, pretend alike to
exclusive orthodoxy/

'Imagine face to face our social elements, still in
effervescence and in struggle, and that old power, rest-
ing on the immovable base of dogma clearly defined,
which has seen crumbling at its feet the ruins of a
hundred peoples and the dust of twenty ages/ He
then imagines a dialogue 'between that antique
spiritual power and the impatient sons of modern
France. What do you ask of me? it seems to say to
them. To live in peace with your governments ? But
1 have already signed with them more than one con-

cordat, and it is not I that desire to break them. Not
to preach insurrection against your laws? I foment
revolution nowhere. Do you wish me to recognise
those laws as the crown of social progress, and that I
should propose them as such to the imitation of the
whole world, and to the admiration of future genera-
tions ? That is what you will never obtain from me.
Speak to me of charity, of necessity, of equity, of
accomplished facts to be accepted, of acquired rights
to be respected : I hear you and understand you,
But do not talk to me either of the ideal or of the
absolute ; for the ideal for me will never be any other
than the future I am awaiting, and, in my eyes, the
absolute is the Truth, which I represent/ ' This lays
the finger on the substance of the debate. If the
society of France is willing to be taken like all its
predecessors, as a mixture of good and evil, imper-
fect as all human things, the peace with the Church
will be made, if it be not made already, But if its
demand be that it should be held sacred, and all but
canonised, I doubt if it will obtain that favour. All
the advocates in the world, able or ardent, impas-
sioned or powerful, statesmen and sectaries, will waste
upon it their pains and their eloquence.' *

These thoughtful and pointed words are enough to
assure anyone how groundless and needless are the
fears of politicians in France lest the (Ecumenical
Council should decree anything inconsistent with the
true bases of civil society. And surely no French
politician will admit that the principles of 1789 are

* Eevue des Deux Mondes, fevrier 1869 : Le Christianisme et la
Societd, pp. 546, 553, par Albert de Broglie.

out of square with those bases of political right. We
have, however, a proof which has now attained the
dignity of a very touching historical fact. Some ten
years ago a young French priest, Professor of Eccle-
siastical History in the seminary of Langres, Leon
Godard, published a short treatise on ' The Principles
of '89 in Relation to Catholic Doctrine.' His object
was, if possible, to remove the supposed contrariety
between the principles of '89 and the principles of
the Christian Church : a wise and charitable purpose
to which we are all daily invited, I may even say pro-
voked, by the alternate tones of perplexity and of
challenge which come up from friends and foes. In
a matter so difficult, and so prejudged by the passions
of men, it is no wonder that a good young priest
should so have written as to lay himself open to cen-
sures not unjust. With the true spirit of a Catholic
and a Christian, he went at once to the Holy See and
submitted himself and his work to correction. The
book was subjected, by the highest authority, to
examination ; and an edition, corrected and enlarged,
was printed in Paris in 1862, with the authorisation
of the Roman censors, and a truly paternal and con-
soling letter from the Bishop of Langres. In that
letter are quoted the words of the President of
the Roman theologians, addressed to the Bishop.
They run as follows : — ' This work, tried by a severe
scrutiny by certain Roman theologians, was found by
them to teach nothing in any way opposed to the
dogmas of Catholic faith ; wherefore they judged that
it may be published.' I remember that I once saw
M. Leon Godard at Rome while his book was under

examination. He had visibly upon him the marks of
sickness and of anxiety. Knowing how much he had
suffered from the censures which had fallen upon
him, I could not but express the sympathy every
Catholic feels towards those who set so noble an ex-
ample of sincerity and submission. Not long after,
the tidings came that Leon Godard was gone to a
world where there is no more any cloud upon the
truth, nor any mistrusts among the servants of God.
In the conclusion of his work, M. Leon Godard
writes : — ' Such is our profession of faith in regard to
the principles of '89. We believe that they do not
contradict any decision of the Catholic, Apostolic,
and Eoman Church, to the judgment of which we sub-
mit without reserve ; and we are convinced that they
are in harmony, in respect to opinion, with the judg-
ment of the most accredited doctors of the Church
and of the schools.7 ' If, then, our pen has not
betrayed our thoughts, it will be seen that there is
nothing in common between our doctrines and those
of false liberalism.' ... 4 We will maintain the
principle of '89 inscribed in the constitution of our
country ; but with all the explanations which we have
given, and which no one has a right to exclude,
because, as we have said, the epoch of '89 is one of a
double face, the one good the other evil; the one
liberal in the legitimate sense of the word, the other
revolutionary. The tactics of our adversaries are to
draw us to a complete rejection of '89, in order at
once to accuse us of a desire to set up again the ancien
regime, with all its abuses, and to overthrow our
existing laws. These tactics we will baffle, and we

will not abandon an inch 01 ground which we have a
benefit in defending and a right to hold.' *

The work of M. Le*on Godard will go a long way
to relieve the fears and to rectify the misconceptions
of certain politicians and political writers in France.
It will show that neither the Council nor the Sylla-
bus, interpreted, not by any individual, but by the
Holy See, need cause the fears — I would venture to
use a familiar word, and say the scare — which in some
quarters appear now to exist.

* Les Principes de '89, et la Doctrine Catholique, par 1'Abbe Leon
Godard. Lecoffre, Paris, 1863.

CHAPTER II.

ON THE OPPORTUNENESS OF DEFINING THE
PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY.

HITHERTO our subjects have been obvious, and our
way easy and clear. But now we approach to matters
over which it is not possible, either to pass in
silence or to venture on the declaration of any final
judgment. I mean, the subjects with which the
(Ecumenical Council will occupy itself. You are
already well aware that the preparatory congregations
are seven in number, and that the matters distributed
to them comprehend faith, philosophy, discipline, the
relations of the Church with civil society, education,
and the like.

We have heard on all sides that the Council will
define this and that doctrine as of faith; then, again,
we are assured that the moderation of wise men will
prevent any such definitions. We learn, chiefly in-
deed from those who are out of the unity of the
Church, but upon alleged communications from the
most learned and most distinguished, as well as the
wisest and most moderate, of the bishops and theolo-
gians in the Catholic Church, that this will be, and
that will not be, entertained by the (Ecumenical
Council.

It can hardly be necessary, reverend and dear

brethren, to say to you that all these confident
assurances are pleasant illusions. None but those
who are admitted to the work of preparing for the
Council know what is in preparation, and they are all
bound by the Pontifical Secret. From them, nothing
can be known ; from others, nothing can be learned.
As S. Augustine said : ' Nemo dare potest quod non
habet.' We may therefore dismiss all those confi-
dential communications.

But beyond this, they who believe, as we do, that
an (Ecumenical Council deliberates and decrees by
an assistance over which human partisanship, political
calculation, private interests, controversial rivalries,
and human errors have no power to prevail, will have
no anxiety as to the result, and no eager predispo-
sitions to express. If the Council should decide
contrary to their previous judgment, they would
rejoice to be corrected by its unerring guidance; if it
should refrain from pronouncing on matters on which
they previously believed a decision to be opportune
or even necessary, they would with their whole heart
submit their judgment, and believe that such a deci-
sion would be not only not necessary, but not even
opportune. In this sense of perfect submission,
springing from faith in the perpetual and infallible
assistance of the Holy Spirit, all Catholics will await
the final result of the first Council of the Vatican.
All this hot anxiety as to its decrees belongs to
minds used to the contentions of convocations which
may err, or to the debates of Parliaments in which
parties rule the day. But to those who believe with
undoubting faith that the acts of the coming Council,

whatsoever they be, will be not only infallibly true,
but wise and opportune, and that the result, whatso-
ever it be, will lay down a rule of faith in matters of
belief, and a rule of thought and judgment in matters
of prudence, there can be no anxiety, or impulsive
desire for this or for that result. They will remain
in a calm equilibrium of mind and will, ready with
promptness and with joy to accept whatsoever decrees
come forth as the wisest and the best. ' He that
believeth, let him not hasten.'*

With this temper of mind, and with this submission
of will, I may now take up the chief topic of the
•Pastoral Letter addressed to you two years ago on
the Centenary of S. Peter; but, in doing so, I shall
endeavour to lay it before you with the arguments
adduced, hinc inde, on either side. We have been
often told of late that one subject to be defined by
the Council will be the infallibility of the Pope.
They who tell us this are chiefly those who, being out
of the unity of the Church, believe this doctrine to be
false ; and they rely upon statements made, as they
allege, by Catholics few and rare in number, who do
not believe the doctrine to be true, or by Catholics
who, believing the doctrine to be true, nevertheless
are of opinion that to define it would not be opportune.

With those who are without, we have nothing now
to do. With the handful of Catholics who do not
believe the infallibility of the Vicar of Jesus Christ
speaking ex cathedrd, we will not now occupy our-
selves. But the opinion of those who believe the
doctrine to be true, but its definition to be inoppor-
* Isaias xxviii. 16.

tune, deserves a full and considerate examination.
We will endeavour so to weigh it, in preparation of
heart to accept whatsoever may be decided by the
supreme authority of the Church.

Once for all, let me repeat that we are now about
to weigh the reasons, not for or against the truth of
the proposition 'that the Vicar of Jesus Christ,
speaking ex cathedrd in matters of faith and morals,
cannot err;' but assuming, for the time, that this
proposition is certainly true, whether it be opportune,
that is, timely, prudent, and expedient, that it should
be defined.

I. EEASONS AGAINST THE DEFINITION.

1. It may be said that no necessity or urgent
reason can now be found for the promulgation of such
a definition, inasmuch as the whole Episcopate and the
whole priesthood of the Catholic Church, a few only
excepted, together with the whole body of the faith-
ful, have always received, and have even in these
times received with veneration, docility and joy, the
doctrinal decisions which have been published by
Pontiffs, and recently by Pius the Ninth.

2. That for the determination of all controversies,
and for the solution of all doubts, the decree of the
Council of Florence respecting the supreme authority
of the Roman Pontiff as universal doctor, together
with the profession of faith enjoined by Pius IV. in
conformity with the mind of the Council of Trent, is
sufficient.

3. That in order to decide and to determine this

question fully and precisely, it would not be enough
to declare simply the Pope to be infallible; but it
would be necessary, at the same time, to declare, and
that by a dogmatic decree, the form and the mode in
which the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff is to be
manifested : which would be a difficult question, and
would involve the authority of the Holy See in many
new and grave complications.

4. That the making of such a definition would be
exposed to this intrinsic difficulty. Suppose the
bishops not to be unanimous, what course should
then be taken ? Suppose, again, that they were
unanimous in declaring the infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff to be a doctrine revealed by Jesus Christ, and
always and in all churches traditionally taught and
believed, would they not, in the very act of defining
the dogma, seem to profess that there is no authority
in defining the faith inherent in the Episcopate ?

5. That such a definition would be of doubtful
utility, and would rather hinder the hope of re-uniting
the Eastern Churches to the Holy See, for the genius
of the Greek and Oriental mind is such as to recoil
from every new word. It is well known what serious
and endless controversies the single phrase c Filioque '
has stirred up. For which reason, in the profession
of faith enjoined by Gregory XIII. for the Greeks,
and by Urban VIII. and Benedict XIY. for the other
Orientals, the very words of the Florentine Decree,
without any change or addition, were retained.

6. That such a definition would retard also the
return which we so much desire of Protestants to the
unity of the Church; inasmuch as the new dogma

would excite and increase in large numbers a prejudice
against the Catholic Church, and especially against
the Eoman Pontiff, and thereby render it more difficult
for them to understand and to embrace the faith, by
raising a suspicion that the doctrine of the Pope's
infallibility is a novelty unknown in earlier ages.

7. That this question, concerning which it is by no
means certain that there is any necessity to define it,
might possibly raise divergencies among the bishops,
who now are of one mind and heart in reverence and
obedience to the Holy See ; a result which would be
most disastrous.

8. That it is not impossible that the defining of the
Pope's infallibility might cause doubts, or, what is
worse, dissensions among Catholics who are otherwise
sound, and perfectly and willingly submissive, from
conviction, to the authority of the Church ; and that,
because certain historical facts and documents are not
as yet sufficiently explained ; so that in many coun-
tries the minds of men are not sufficiently prepared
for such a definition.

9. That such a new decree would be no remedy
for the perversity and contumacy of the few persons
who reject the decisions of the Supreme Pontiff, and
appeal from them to a General Council, as the only
judge of controversies; forasmuch as their aberrations
come not from error of intellect, but from perversity
of will. The infallible authority of Almighty God
does not hinder men from rejecting the truth He has
taught, and following their own errors. c They have
Moses and the prophets, let them hear them ; if they
hear not them, neither will they believe ' the defini-

tions of the Church. There is a difference, also, be-
tween a definition of the infallibility of the Pope and
that of any other Christian doctrine. In the latter
case, the authority of the Church may be sufficient to
overcome any doubt. In the former it is this very
authority, the principle and fountain of all certainty
in faith, which is in question. Would it not, there-
fore, be more prudent to spare the weakness of those
who are not yet able to bear this definition, which,
though many think it to be useful, nobody thinks
to be necessary? Would not the example of Our
Lord and the Apostles commend to us this mode
of proceeding?

10. That it may be feared lest, by a perversion of
the true sense of such a decree, some may be induced
to ignore and to despise the authority given by our
Lord to bishops, especially in the condemnation of rash
and pernicious opinions in philosophy and theology.

11. That it may also be feared lest bishops, whom
for some years the Apostolic authority has been
calling into activity, in order that they should not
straightway send to Rome all doubts about books and
matters of which it is their office to judge, might,
by such a definition, be rendered more backward in
exercising their episcopal office of judges of doctrine.

12. That it would soon probably follow from such
a definition, by reason of the nature of man, that
not only matter of doctrine on which the supreme
decision of the Church is desired, but also many
other kinds of business would be sent to Rome, there
to be judged, decided, and solved ; so that every-
thing would crowd in to the centre of unity. And

great as is the erudition, experience, justice, pru-
dence, and authority of the Koman Congregations,
such a course would not be for the prosperity of the
Universal Church ; for the Church, as the Holy Ghost
teaches, is a body, but the health of a body depends
on the force and motion of all and each of the mem-
bers. ' If all were one member, where were the
body?7 (1 Cor. xii. 19.) Nobody doubts that the chief
member of the body is the head, and that in it, as in
its centre and seat, the vital force resides ; and yet no
one will say that the soul resides in the head alone,
which is rather diffused as its form throughout the
members of the whole body.

These, then, are reasons for judging that a dogmatic
decision on the infallibility of the Pope would not be
opportune. Let that suffice which has been already
declared, and has been believed by all ; namely, that
the Church, whether congregated in Council, or dis-
persed throughout the world, but in the Successor of
Peter always one, is always infallible, and that the
Supreme Pontiff, according to the words of the
Council of Florence, is 'the teacher of the whole
Church and of all Christians/ But as to the mys-
terious gift of infallibility, which by God is bestowed
upon the Episcopate united to the Pope, and at the
same time is bestowed in a special manner on the
Supreme Pontiff, and by which gift the Church,
whether in an (Ecumenical Council or by the Pope
without a Council, guards and explains the truths of
revelation, it is not expedient to make further decla-
rations unless a proved necessity demand, which
necessity at present does not exist.

II. ANSWERS TO THE REASONS AGAINST THE DEFINITION.

On the other hand it is urged :

1. That if the Episcopate, priesthood, and people,
are, with so few exceptions, unanimous in receiving
with submission and assent the Pontifical Acts, there
would not only be no risk in promulgating such a
decree, but they would rejoice to see the formal
reason of that Catholic submission justified by an
authoritative definition; or, if the number of those
who refuse submission be more numerous, a necessity
thereby is proved for the declaration of the truth.

2. That the Decree of the Council of Florence
ought to be sufficient; and would be, if it were not
misinterpreted by those who deny the infallibility of
the Supreme Pontiff, speaking ex cathedra. The
existence of this misinterpretation by Gallicans and
by Anglicans shows that the decree is not sufficient.

3. That the doctrine of the infallibility of the
Pope, held, as it is alleged, by all but a small number,
is already subject to the questions as to the form and
mode of its exercise. These questions will not
become less clear by being defined; and by being
made more clear, the complications which now arise
from want of a clear declaration will be avoided.
Erroneous or doubtful opinions give rise to compli-
cations; but truth excludes doubt and obscurity in
proportion as it is precisely defined.

4. That if the bishops were not unanimous as to
the making of a definition, no doubt the prudence of

the Council would know what course to take. The
Council of Trent made no definition of the Immacu-
late Conception. It went to the very verge, but no
further. If the bishops were unanimous in declaring
the prerogatives of the Head of the Church, they
would not thereby abdicate or divest themselves of
any privileges or endowments divinely conferred
upon the Episcopate. The divine endowments of
the Church are not at war with each other. The
Apostles did not cease to be infallible because their
Head was so. The infallibility of the Church does
not diminish the infallibility of Councils. The en-
dowments of the body are the prerogatives of the
head, and both have their proper sphere and their
full and legitimate exercise. No bishop alone is
infallible, nor is the whole Episcopate infallible
without its Head. Of what, then, could they divest
themselves by declaring their Head to be infallible?

5. That the hope of reunion with the East is alone
to be found in the explicit recognition of the divine
prerogatives of the Church. Reunion on anything
short of this, on any base, obscure, ambiguous, or
equivocal, would not endure for a day. The rent
would be made worse. The Decree of the Council of
Florence, which is alleged to be sufficient, was not
sufficient for the Greeks. They accepted it, but as
soon as they were again at Constantinople they threw
it to the winds. Reunion is not to be gained or to be
sought by reducing its conditions, like a bargain, to
the minimum ; but by an explicit and precise accept-
ance of the truth. Gregory XIII., Urban VIII. ,
Benedict XIV., kept strictly to the Florentine Decree,

because no other existed then. No other exists at
this day; and the question is, whether the events of
the last three centuries do not demand a more precise
declaration of the supreme authority.

6. That the return of Protestants to the Church is
more retarded now by the apparent contradiction
among Catholics on the subject of infallibility, than
it could be by the definition of the infallibility of
the Pope. They now reject the infallibility of the
Church altogether, because they believe that we are
divided, and therefore in doubt about it. What we
seem to doubt, they are encouraged to deny. We
seem to be in doubt because we are divided, not
about the infallibility of the Church, but about the
infallibility of its Head. They believe this answer to
be a subterfuge. So long as the infallibility of the
Pope is not authoritatively declared, they cover them-
selves under the shelter of those Catholics who deny
it. And to our shame, they borrow their belief that
the opinion is a novelty, not to be found in earlier
ages, from ourselves. The Gallicans put weapons
into their hands, which they use against all infalli-
bility whatsoever.

7. That no divergence among the bishops is to
be feared, the unanimity alleged above may assure
us. But if it were to exist, in what would it be
of greater moment than in respect to the doctrine
of the Immaculate Conception at the Council of
Trent? The prudence of the Council, both natural
and supernatural, would know how to deal with such
a contingency ; and if divergence in anything should
arise, no diminution of filial and cordial obedience

c 2

to the Holy See could follow in those things where
all are unanimous.

8. That if the pastors of the Church be unanimous,
there is no fear of dissensions or doubts among the
faithful. Rather, the dissensions and doubts, if any
now exist, arise from the allegation that the pastors
are not unanimous as to the infallibility of the Vicar
of Jesus Christ. It is of the highest moment to
expose and extinguish this false allegation, so boldly
and invidiously made by heretics and schismatics of
every name. For this reason alone the sooner the unani-
mity of the pastors of the Church can be manifested
the better, both for truth and for the salvation of souls.
The same reason holds as to the supposed historical
difficulties. They have been examined and exposed
over and over again; but they will be perpetually
repeated, and with increased confidence, so long as the
infallibility of the Roman Pontiff shall seem to be
left undefined. Where the Church has spoken, the
faithful are not open to seduction. While the Church
is silent, the spirits of error are clamorous and plaus-
ible. A definition would silence all voices but the
voice of the Church.

9. That such a decree would satisfy those who, out
of heretical perversity, oppose the Faith, or out of
ignorance and insubordination excommunicate them-
selves by appealing from the Supreme Pontiff to a
General Council, is not to be expected. But if there
be a hope for them, it would be in rendering clear be-
yond all possibility of question the divine certainty of
Faith; and this is closely connected with the divine
authority of the Head of the Church. The example

of our Lord in sparing the infirmities of the weak,
who were as yet unable to bear mysteries not yet
revealed, is no warrant for keeping back any revealed
truth because men will not believe the revelation
already made. This would tacitly assume that the
infallibility of the Vicar of Jesus Christ is not
a revealed truth. If it be a revealed truth, our
Lord's example is not in point ; still less that of the
Apostles, who 4 kept back nothing,' and declared to
the faithful 'all the counsel of God.'*

10. That the perverse interpretation or abuse of a
decree must always be only partial, and can never
be either widespread or permanent in the Church, and
can therefore afford no reason against its being made,
if the proper reasons exist for making it; and that
the definition of the infallibility of the Eoman Pon-
tiff can in no way lessen the authority of bishops as
judges of doctrine in their own flocks, but on the
contrary give great support to all their legitimate
acts. It does not appear how bishops should be more
authoritative because their Head is less so.

11. That, for the same reason, it does not appear
probable that bishops would be less active as pastors
and judges in their own churches because the doc-
trine which they already unanimously believe had
received its formal definition. If the belief of its
truth does not now produce these consequences, it
does not yet appear why the definition of that truth
should do so.

12. That, lastly, no centralisation of the ordinary
administration of the Universal Church could legiti-

* Acts xx. 20, 27.

mately follow or be in any way promoted by a defini-
tion of the infallibility of the Vicar of Jesus Christ,
speaking ex cathedrA, in matters of faith and morals.
Such a definition belongs to a higher order, with
which the ordinary pastoral office of bishops can
rarely have any immediate contact. Questions of
faith and morals, on which the Church has not
already judged, very rarely arise in any diocese.
The infallibility here in question has no relation to the
multifarious administration of dioceses. Such a defi-
nition as we speak of would either have no appre-
ciable influence on the ordinary administration of
bishops ; or if any, only in the way of giving certainty
and solidity to the judicial acts and pastoral juris-
diction of the Episcopate throughout the world.

For these reasons, it appears to some that the
objections to such a definition have no sufficient
weight to dissuade the Council from making it.

III. REASONS FOR THE DEFINITION.

Such then, reverend and dear brethren, is a brief
statement of the arguments for and against, as to the
question whether such a definition be opportune.
Thus far we have weighed only the objections and
the answers. Those who believe that such a definition
would be not only opportune, but is urgently re-
quired by the circumstances of these times, give their
reasons as follows : —

1. They think such a definition would be opportune
because the doctrine is true ; for if true, can it be
said with prudence that to declare it is not oppor-

tune? Is not this question already closed by the
fact that God has thought it opportune to reveal
it? Can it be permitted to us to think that what He
has thought it opportune to reveal, it is not oppor-
tune for us to declare? It is true indeed that,
in revealing the Faith, God in His wisdom and
compassion was slow, deliberate, and gradual, mea-
suring His light to the infirmities of the human intel-
ligence, and preparing the minds of men for a fuller
manifestation, both of His presence and His kingdom.
But this divine procedure, binding as it may be on us
in dealing with heathen nations who have never heard
His name, is in no way binding, nay, is not even per-
missible, in dealing with those who have been baptized
into the full revelation of faith. From them nothing
may be kept back. With them no economy can be
admitted. There is now no 4 disciplina arcani ' among
the members of His mystical Body. They are illumi-
nated to know 4 the Truth as it is in Jesus ' in all its
fulness : ' that which you hear in the ear, preach ye
upon the housetops.'*

By 'opportune,' then, in the mind of the objector,
must be meant something politic or diplomatic, some
calculations of local expediency in respect to nations
and governments. This sense of opportunity is
proper to legislatures and cabinets in deliberating on
public utilities and opinions; but in the Church of
God, and in the truth of revelation, it is always
opportune to declare what God has willed that man
should know. Nay, more than opportune : if the infal-
libility of the Vicar of Jesus Christ be a doctrine of
* S. Matthew x. 27.

Jesus Christ, ' necessity lieth upon us, and woe unto
us if we preach not the gospel.7* It may, however, be
said that many revealed truths are not defined ; and
that it does not follow that any doctrine ought to be
defined, only because it is true.

2. This is indeed certain, but a further reason for
defining it is easy to find. This revealed truth has
been denied. There are two reasons for which the
Church from the beginning has defined the doctrines
of faith : the one, to make them clear, definite, and
precise; the other, to reaffirm, and to defend them,
when they have been called in question. If the infal-
libility of the visible Head of the Church had never
been denied, it might not have been necessary to
define it now. The true doctrine of justification was
never defined till it was denied. The nature of inspir-
ation has never yet been defined, but the denial which
is now widespread may one day demand it. In like
manner the infallibility of the Eoman Pontiff has been
denied. Its definition therefore becomes necessary.
We affirm that it was never formally denied before
the period of the Council of Constance, and that this
modern denial of the truth renders its definition
necessary. We are told by objectors that the denial
is far more ancient and widespread: that only makes
the definition all the more necessary. They who, to
make the doctrine appear doubtful, or to prove it to
be false, represent the denial of it to be ancient and
widespread, in that proportion increase the necessity
of declaring it by a dogmatic decree. Such a denial
as emanated from the so-called Assembly of the French

* 1 Cor. ix. 16.

clergy in 1682 would amply suffice to show that the
definition would be opportune.

3. And further: the denial of the infallibility of
the Roman Pontiff has already generated extensive
doubt as to the truth of the doctrine. We are asked,
if the doctrine be revealed, how is it that you allow
it to be denied ? If you are not doubtful about it,
why not put an end to doubt by declaring it to be
true ? It is certain that not only Protestants believe
the doctrine of the Pope's infallibility to be an open
question among Catholics, but some Catholics are
tempted to believe it to be theologically doubtful, and
therefore not revealed; irreconcilable with history; a
modern exaggeration arising from the adulation of
courtiers and the ambition of popes. In France, to
deny it has become a test of political independence.
In England, some Catholics are stunned and fright-
ened by the pretentious assumption of patristic learn-
ing and historical criticism of anonymous writers,
until they doubt, or shrink in false shame from be-
lieving a truth for which their fathers died. The con-
tact of the Catholics of England with the Catholics of
France, good and beneficial as it has been, never-
theless introduced among us both books and habits
of thought which were of the Gallican school. This
has spread among us an opinion that the infallibility
of the Pope, if possibly true, is nevertheless doubtful ;
and this doubt, dormant and harmless as it maybe in
pious and simple minds, who are never put to the
test about it, and if tested would instinctively go
right in spite of intellectual perplexities, is in restless
and active minds full of danger, above all in a Pro-

testant country, and in the midst of all manner of
controversial warfare, The admission of a doubt as
to any revealed doctrine is fatal to faith in that
doctrine.

4. It would appear, not only to be opportune that
this doctrine should be placed beyond the reach of
doubt by a dogmatic decree, but that such a decree
would be specially opportune at this time, because
the formal and systematic denial of the truth in
question has arisen since the last General Council.

It may at first sight appear that this statement is
at variance with the common assertion of theologians,
that the denial of the infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff had its rise in the circumstances of the
Council of Constance. Two distinct periods must be
noted in this subject. From the Council of Con-
stance to the Council of Trent this denial was con-
fined to the opinions of a handful of men, and to the
disputation of the schools in France. So little was it
known elsewhere, that when the Church met in the
Council of Florence, it made, without hesitation, its
celebrated decree on the prerogatives of the Roman
Pontiff as the Universal Pastor and Doctor of the
Church. Nevertheless the erroneous opinion lingered
on from the time of Gerson, Peter d'Ailly, and
Almain, in what De Marca calls the ' Old Sorbonne,'
to distinguish it from the Sorbonne of his own day.
It is certain, then, that before the Council of Trent
this opinion had not assumed the systematic and
elaborate form given to it by the Assembly of 1682,
and by those who have defended the Four Articles.
This modern and dogmatic form of the denial of the

Pope's infallibility, ex cathedrd, was completed in the
seventeenth century, that is, since the last General
Council.

5. Now, if the next General Council meet and
separate without taking any notice of this denial, one
of two inferences may perhaps be drawn. It may be
said that Gallicanism has obtained its place among
tolerated opinions ; or, at least, that it may be held
with impunity. It does not readily appear what
could be said in answer to this. It would be hardly
enough to say that it was not thought opportune to
meet so grave a denial of a doctrine universally taught
everywhere out of France, nor to carry into execution
the acts of Alexander VIII., Innocent XL, and Pius
VI., who have authoritatively censured it. ' Qui
tacet, consentire videtur.'

6. It cannot be said that the denial of the infalli-
bility of the Eoman Pontiff is obscure, unobtrusive,
and latent. It is patent, notorious, importunate, and
organised. It exists, not indeed in power, as once it
did in France ; but it exists still. Its roots are yet
in the soil and alive. It exists in a handful of active
and hostile minds in England and in Germany, and
it has been taken up by Protestants in both countries
as a weapon of controversy or of contumely against
the Catholic Church, and especially the Holy See.
To find or to invent a division among us is their
only hope. To foment the least divergence into a
conflict is their chief policy. There can be no doubt
that Gallicanism affords them their most advantageous
attack. Catholics are visibly united on all doctrines
of faith, even on the Immaculate Conception; but on

the infallibility of the Pope, Gallicaiiism has caused a
divergence, which Protestants think or pretend to be
a contradiction in faith. The combined action of
Gallicanism within the Church and of Protestants
without it, has given to this erroneous opinion a
notoriety in the last two centuries, and especially in
France and England, which takes it out of the cate-
gory of imperfect and innocuous errors which may
be left to evaporate or to be absorbed. It has in-
scribed itself in the history of the Church, and will
live on until, by the Church, it is finally condemned.
7. Prudence would require the condemnation of
any notorious error which may hereafter produce ill
effects; but the denial of infallibility in the Head of
the Church has already produced ill effects ; neverthe-
less, so long as no condemnation is stamped upon the
error, it will always pass for a tolerated opinion.
Impunity is taken for acquittal. The faithful will
never believe that it is wrong to do that which they
see done every day, and even by ecclesiastics, without
note of censure. They do not know that three popes
have condemned the denial of their infallibility; and
if they did they would justly say, 'But as we are not
bound to believe the infallibility of the Pope, there-
fore his condemning the denial of his infallibility
proves nothing. If he be infallible, why are we not
told so; if he be not infallible, where is the harm of
saying so ? ' The effect of this upon the doctrinal
authority of the Church is gravely injurious. When
it is affirmed that Scripture and tradition, and theo-
logical reason, and the acts of Councils, and the
declarations of Pontiffs, all attest the infallibility of

the Vicar of Jesus Christ, speaking ex cathedra, and
that three Pontiffs have prohibited the denial of it,
and that the whole consensus of theologians, with the
exception of a handful, and that a transient and
national school, all alike declare the same, we are met
at once by the question, c Why, then, is it permitted
to deny it? What may be done with impunity can-
not be wrong.' ' Where there is no law, there is no
transgression.' This may not be logical; but the
answer to this is not obvious.

8 . And further, the prolonged existence of this error
keeps up a theological and practical disunion in mind
and feeling among the faithful. Let the truth be de-
clared, whichever way it go. Truth generates union
and peace; doubt generates secret antipathies, conten-
tions, and mistrusts. We live in an age and country
where Catholics are compelled to hear, and, if not to
read, at least to know, what the public opinion and
public press of an anti-Catholic people can say against
the Faith and the Church. They hear that their
pastors are Ultramontanes ; that they are exaggerated
and extreme ; one-sided and partisan, ignorant, super-
ficial, and untruthful in history, untrusty in reason-
ing. All this they hear, perhaps, with offence and
pain ; but it leaves its blight behind. Secret doubts
and misgivings arise. They say to themselves :
'Perhaps, after all, there is some truth in all this.
If there were none, could it have been so often and
so confidently said? Where there is smoke, there is
fire.' A small number of Catholics, also — for what
motives God knows — have added to this scandal,
partly by writings bearing their names, partly by

anonymous writing in Protestant papers and reviews.
All this would expire like smoke when the hearth is
cold, if there were an authoritative declaration of the
truth. Till then, they who, in the face of every
kind of malevolent imputation and impertinent criti-
cism, defend that which the Theological Schools of
the whole Church, under the direct sanction of the
Holy See, have both taught and teach in every
Catholic country, must patiently bear the petulant
and pretentious criticism of anti- Catholic minds,
aided, unhappily, by some who bear at least the
Catholic name. They will not, indeed, be unwilling
to bear it for the truth's sake, nor do they care for
any contempt for their own; but they have a con-
tinual sorrow for the scandal of the weak, the hin-
drance of truth, the perversion of minds, the aliena-
tion of hearts, the party spirit, the mistrust among
brethren, and, worst of all, the mistrust of flocks in
their pastors, which are caused by these animosities
and infidelities.

9. Of these scandals, a direct effect is that the
action of truth, both within and without the Church,
at least in this country, is enfeebled. All who have
experience in the state of minds out of the Church,
and in their painful approaches towards it, and all
whose duty it has been to hear and to read the objec-
tions of those who enter not in themselves and hinder
those who are entering, will know that the alleged
doubts about infallibility and the supposed extrava-
gances of Ultramontanes return in every case with
the constancy and monotony of the tide. The effect of
this is to confuse, perplex, and indispose the will. A

dubious authority, like a dubious law, imposes no obli-
gation. No one will submit to he knows not what.
The contentions of Gallicanism and Ultramontanism
obscure the authority of the Church, and make it
seem to be doubtful. Utterly false and unreasonable
as this is, it has its effect in alarming, confusing the
mind, and rendering it incapable of discernment, and
the will indisposed to submission.

On our own people within, thank God, such temp-
tations have less power ; but every priest will know
by his experience what misery and mischief has been
done to timid or scrupulous, or, again, to rash and
contentious minds. It must never be forgotten that
faith, like humility and purity, is a grace of the Holy
Spirit. It is to be matured and strengthened by
truth and by obedience ; it may be endangered and
extinguished by falsehood and disobedience. But
doubt is the shadow of falsehood and the prelude of
unbelief. If there be any truth of the faith in which
ambiguity is perilous, it is the Divine and infallible
authority on which all faith reposes. The infallibility
of the Vicar of Jesus Christ is the infallibility of the
Church in its Head, and is the chief condition through
which its own infallibility is manifested to the world.
To convert this, which is the principle of Divine
certainty, into a doubtful question, and one of the
highest endowments of the Mystical Body, into a
subject of domestic strife and fraternal alienation, is a
master-stroke of the Enemy of Truth and souls.

10. It is some times alleged that if the infallibility of
the Pope, speaking ex catliedrd, were denned, it would
meet with widespread refusal. Not so : rather, like

the Immaculate Conception, it would be met by uni-
versal acceptance. The same prophets in sackcloth
prophesied unbelief, contention and schism, before the
Immaculate Conception was defined. We were then
told that there was not a trace of it in antiquity ; that
the Fathers were against it ; that Schoolmen and
Saints denied it ; that to define it would separate the
Church of to-day from the Church of the past, re-
move faith from the broad tradition of the Christian
world to the airy basis of the Pope's authority, draw
narrower the conditions of communion by adding a
new test, and fatally divide the 'Latin Church.' The
answer is before men's eyes. Nevertheless, we have
volumes of matter, undigested and misunderstood,
from Fathers and Schoolmen, published and repub-
lished, without a trace of consciousness that a com-
plete exposure of all this incoherence has again and
again been made. The same is now the prophecy as
to the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff. There is
no trace of it in antiquity ; the Fathers knew nothing
of it ; the Schoolmen are against it ; the Saints ignore
it; the Councils exclude tjie notion of it; the tra-
dition of thirteen hundred years refutes it; the
adulation and ambition, the ignorance and the ser-
vility of the Roman Curia have invented a novelty
which all the independent, learned, and noble-minded
of all countries have, with irresistible logic and sur-
passing erudition, in vain resisted. We are told that
this novelty is all that is now wanting to narrow the
Roman Church to its Latin dimensions; that its
definition will at once exclude all the independent,
learned, and noble minds lingering and suffering

within its oppressive unity ; that, as true friends of
the 'Latin Church/ they urge us, with all cordial
solicitude, to refrain from declaring the Roman Pon-
tiff to be infallible ; that our true policy is compre-
hension, the concession of points to which their
patristic learning forbids submission, the explaining
away of the Council of Trent to admit the Thirty-
nine Articles according to Sancta Clara; that if,
unhappily, under the blind pressure of the ignorant
and the courtly adulation of the ambitious, and, above
all, the subtle management of the Jesuits, this crown-
ing aberration be added to the Roman theology, the
Latin Church will finally stand convicted by Scrip-
ture, Antiquity, Fathers, Schoolmen, Councils, His-
torical Science, and all that is independent, learned,
noble, and masculine in its own communion, and be
thereby delivered over to its own infatuation and
downfall. To these self-complacent advisers it is
enough to say, c Ubi Petrus ibi Ecclesia.' There is
not to be found a theological truth, not as yet imposed
as of faith, for which such a cumulus of proof exists of
every kind and of every age, and under every one
of the loci iheologici, as for the infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff. The evidence of the belief of the
universal Church in the immaculate sinlessness and
pre-eminent sanctification of the Mother of God, vast
as it is, does not approach, either in extent or in
explicitness, to the evidence for the infallibility, that
is, the stability of faith in the Successor of Peter.
There is no truth which already so pervades the
mind of the whole Church, by unbroken tradition
from the beginning ; nor any which would meet with

a more universal and unanimous acceptance on its
definition and promulgation. Even in France, the
only country in which, for a time, and under the
pressure of political causes, the doctrine has been
opposed, the opposition exists no longer as a theology
or a school. '•La doctrine franqaise,' as its friends
truly but unwarily call it, lingers as a national tra-
dition; surviving rather as a reminiscence than as a
conviction.

11. The definition of the Immaculate Conception
has filled up and completed the analogy of the new
creation, and of the Second Adam and the Second Eve.
It has also rendered precise and complete the doctrines
of original sin and of grace. In like manner the
treatise of Divine Faith has one part as yet undeter-
mined, which would be completed by the completion
of the doctrine of infallibility. The virtue of divine
faith has for its formal motive the veracity of God,
and for its ordinary means of knowing the revelations
of God, the proposition of the Church. But if the
proponent be fallible, the certainty on which the
revelation comes to us cannot be divine. The Church,
by the divine assistance of the Holy Ghost, is infal-
lible, and the certainty of the truths proposed by it
to our faith is divine. But if the Head of the Church
be fallible, the certainty of truths because proposed by
him — as, for instance, the Immaculate Conception —
cannot be divine, and is therefore fallible; but if fal-
lible, it cannot exclude doubt, and for that reason can-
not generate faith. Where faith is, doubt cannot be ;
and where doubt is, faith ceases to be. The treatise

of Divine Faith is therefore incomplete so long as
the infallibility of the proponent be not fully denned.

12. The same is true as to the treatise de
Ecdesia. The infallibility of the Church dispersed
or congregated is matter of necessary faith. The
infallibility of the eighteen General Councils in which
the Church has been congregated is also of neces-
sary faith. But the Church, during the last eighteen
centuries, has done a multitude of acts by its Head
alone. Are these acts infallible or not ? For in-
stance, the declaration of original sin by Innocent
L, and of the Canon by Pope Gelasius ; and more
recently, of the Immaculate Conception by Pius IX.
What does the treatise de Ecdesia teach as to the
Head of the Church and his prerogatives? Are his
declarations and condemnations in matters of faith
and morals fallible or infallible ? The question has
been formally raised, and is of the greatest practical
moment. Until it be solved, the treatise de Ecde-
sia is so far incomplete.

13. The practical importance of this question will
be manifest at once by remembering that for three
hundred years the Pontiffs have elaborately and
expressly condemned a long series of propositions in
theology and philosophy. The ' Theses Damnatae ;
are very numerous. Now, are these fallible or in-
fallible? Do they require of us the assent of
faith, resting upon the Divine authority from which
they emanate; or are they venerable utterances, to
be respected indeed always, with assent if we agree
with them, with silence if we do not? Has the

D 2

Church, then, for three hundred years, been mistaking
doubtful utterances for certainties; and that in
matters of faith and morality, involving the absolu-
tion of souls from sin? They who deny the infal-
libility of the Pontiffs have here a hard task to
reconcile their theory with fidelity to conscience and
to truth.

14. But to pass from the region of theology to
that of politics. The definition of the infallibility of
the Pontiffs, speaking ex cathedrcl, is needed to exclude
from the minds of Catholics the exaggerated spirit of
national independence and pride which has, in these
last centuries, so profoundly afflicted the Church.
If there be anything which a Catholic Englishman
ought to know, it is the subtile, stealthy influence
by which the national spirit invades and assimilates
the Church to itself; and the bitter fruits of heresy
and schism which that assimilation legitimately bears.
The history of England, from S. Thomas of Canter-
bury to Henry VIII., is a series of steady encroach-
ments of the civil power upon the liberty of the
Church, in all its operations, in its possessions, dis-
cipline, elections, tribunals, appeals, and jurisdictions.
The whole English Church became charged and satu-
rated by the secular spirit; its whole mind was
clouded, and its whole will was bribed, till under
Henry VIII., by a few acts of intimidation, its resist-
ance was quelled; and it fell, whole and altogether,
under the power of the Crown. The schism once com-
plete, the work of heresy was inevitable, and was pur-
sued at- leisure. Such might have been also the history
of France from Charles VII. to Louis XIV. The

French monarchy confirmed its hold on the Church
of France. The process of subjugating the eccle-
siastical liberties to the parliaments and tribunals of
the country was steadily pursued ; but the Church of
a great nation, or rather of an aggregate of nations,
in close contact and affinity with the Holy See, with
the memories and even the present influences of
Avignon in the midst of it, could not fall under a
royal master, as the Church of an island, far off and
detached from Eome, fell under the violence of a
royal tyrant. The great Church of France was led,
indeed, to the verge of danger through its national
traditions, but it has never passed the line. English
nationalism became the Anglican schism. French
nationalism checked itself at the Gallican Articles.
The Anglican Reformation has no perils for the
Catholic Church ; it is external to it, in open heresy
and schism. Gallicanism is within its unity, and is
neither schism nor heresy. It is a very seductive
form of national Catholicism, which, without breaking-
unity, or positively violating faith, soothes the pride
to which all great nations are tempted, and en-
courages the civil power to patronise the local Church
by a tutelage fatal to its liberty. It is therefore
certain that Gallicanism is more dangerous to Catho-
lics than Anglicanism. The latter is a plague of
which we are not susceptible ; the former is a disease
which may easily be taken. Gallicanism is also the
last form of Regalism yet lingering in the Church.
The Imperialism of Constantinople and of Germany
is gone. Time has rendered it obsolete, because im-
possible; the ecclesiastical prerogatives of medieval

Europe have likewise expired, with the religious
unity which alone rendered them just. But the
unity of the French nation renders it yet possible
that influences and claims inconsistent with the
liberty of the Church may still exist. Anything that
fosters this idea of National Churches, independent,
except in a few vital relations, of the Holy See,
powerfully excites a spirit which is not filial. An
Episcopate which depends as little as it can upon
the Pope, rears a laity which depends as little as
possible upon the Episcopate. I am not saying that
such is the spirit of the noble and Catholic people of
France at this day ; but I should not be going too far
if I were to give this as a description of Gallicanism,
and of the spirit and tendencies generated by it. So
long as the Articles of 1682 remain as a standard of
orthodoxy, this spirit and tendency will be kept
alive. When these Articles are buried, one of the
worst germs of Regalism will be extinct.

In speaking of France, I think it a duty to guard
against a misunderstanding which appears — contrary,
I must believe, to all reason and justice — to have
arisen from some words addressed by me to you,
reverend and dear brethren, two years ago, in a
Pastoral on the eighteenth Centenary of S. Peter's
Martyrdom.* In speaking of the supremacy of S.

* Two pamphlets have appeared in Paris, the one by the Abbe
St. Pol, Chanoine Honoraire, the other by the Abbe d'Upalgaz, de
1'Universite d'Alcala. In both, and almost in the same words, I
am censured for saying that Gallicanism produced the great French
Revolution. No proposition so shallow was uttered by me. What
I 'really did say, and here repeat, is, that, as the despotism
of the Tudors corrupted the Church in England, and produced

Peter's See, it was inevitable that I should speak on
the subject of Gallicanism ; but I endeavoured so to
do it as to avoid wounding, by the lightest word, the
profound Catholic instincts of our brethren in France.
Many of its most eminent sons, both ecclesiastics and
laity, have so spoken to me of what I then said as to
assure me that my words gave them no cause to
think me wanting in heartfelt veneration and affec-
tion for the Church in France, glorious in all its
history for martyrs, confessors, and saints ; fruitful
in all deeds of fidelity to the Holy See, and of
charity to all mankind. I should not only grieve,
but I should hold myself guilty of a high crime
against humility, charity, and justice if I had so
spoken; and I desire here and now, if any word of
mine shall seem to be wanting in veneration and
admiration for the Church and people of France,
hereby to disclaim all fault, except for the want of
skill in dealing with a delicate but inevitable subject.
I make this declaration now by way of preface to
what I am about to add. In the Pastoral of 1867 I
was recalling to your mind the history of Gallicanism,
and my words were these : — c The boldness or the
unconsciousness with which Gallicanism is sometimes
put forward as an opinion which Catholics are free to
hold without blame, and as a basis on which Churches
are to unite under the shelter of Bossuet, and as a

both Anglicanism and the revolutions which have destroyed
it ; so also the despotism of certain French monarchs paralysed
the liberty of the Church, and produced both Gallicanism and the
revolutionary reaction which has effaced Gallicanism in France.
It is a little daring, and hardly respectful, to tell us that the mar-
tyred clergy of 1799 died for Gallicanism.

standard of Catholic moderation in rebuke of ultra-
montane excesses, makes it seasonable to tell its
history. Gallicanism is no more than a transient and
modern opinion which arose in France, without war-
rant or antecedents in the ancient Theological Schools
of the French Church ; a royal theology, as suddenly
developed and as parenthetical as the Thirty-nine
Articles, affirmed only by a small number out of the
numerous Episcopate of France, indignantly rejected
by many of them ; condemned in succession by three
Pontiffs; declared by the Universities of Louvain
and Douai to be erroneous ; retracted by the bishops
of France ; condemned by Spain, Hungary, and
other countries, and condemned over again in the
bull " Auctorem Fidei." ' * Whether I am justified
in using these words, the next chapter will show.

Now, in the following chapter I will give the out-
line of the history of the doctrine of the infallibility
of the Koman Pontiff; and in doing so sufficient evi-
dence will, I hope, appear by the way to justify the
assertions of the above quotation.

What will appear may be thus stated : —

1. That Gallicanism has no warrant in the doctrinal
practice or tradition of the Church, either in France
or at large, in the thousand years preceding the
Council of Constance.

2. That the first traces of Gallicanism are to be
found about the time of that Council.

3. That after the Council of Constance they were
rapidly and almost altogether effaced from the theo-
logy of the Church in France, until their revival in.
1682.

* The Centenary of S. Peter, etc., p. 41.

4. That the Articles of 1682 were conceived by
Jansenists, and carried through by political and
oppressive means contrary to the sense of the Church
in France.

5. That the Theological Faculties of the Sorbonne,
and of France generally, nobly resisted and refused to
teach them.

I am the more anxious to render this testimony to
the Church in France, and to the Sorbonne, because
I never fully knew, till I read the evidence published
in this year by M. Gerin, how nobly that illustrious
Church contended against the Articles of 1682.

CHAPTER III.

TRADITION OF THE INFALLIBILITY OF
THE KOMAN PONTIFF.

THUS far we have enumerated, briefly, the reasons
adduced for and against denning the infallibility
of the Pontiff, speaking ex cathedrd. In order, then,
to preclude as far as possible any ambiguity or un-
certainty as to the limits and extension of the doc-
trine of the infallibility of the Pontiff, speaking ex
cathedra, intended by me in this Pastoral, and by
those known to me, who believe this to be a truth
of revelation, I will once for all state the various
opinions which have been put forward in opposition
and in its defence. No better analysis can be found
than that of Bellarmine, which I will therefore
simply transcribe. After saying that the Pontiff
may be considered in four ways — 1, As a private
person; 2, As a private Doctor; 3, As Pontiff alone
with his counsellors; 4, As Pontiff with a General
Council, Bellarmine says: — •

1. ' Both Catholics and heretics agree in two things ;
first, that the Pontiff, even as Pontiff and with his
counsellors, or even with a General Council, may
err in. controversies as to particular facts, which
chiefly depend on the information and testimonies of
men; secondly, that the Pontiff, as a private doctor,
may err even in questions of faith and morals; and

that from ignorance, as at times happens to other
doctors.

2. 4 Next, all Catholics agree in two other things,
not indeed with heretics, but among themselves.
First, that the Pontiff, with a General Council, cannot
err in framing decrees of faith, or general precepts of
morals. Secondly, that the Pontiff alone, or with his
own private Council, whether he may err or not, in
deciding anything in a dubious matter is, nevertheless,
to be obediently listened to by all the faithful.

' These points so disposed of, only four opinions
remain.

4 The first is, that the Pontiff, even as Pontiff,
although he define a doctrine with a General Council,
may be a heretic himself, and teach heresy. . . .
This is the opinion of all heretics, especially of
Luther and Calvin.

i The second, that the Pontiff, even as Pontiff, may
be a heretic, and may teach heresy if he define with-
out a General Council. This is the opinion of Nilus
and the later Greeks, of Gerson, Almain, and others.

4 The third, that the Pontiff cannot in any way be
heretical, or publicly teach heresy, even though he
alone frame a definition : which is the opinion of
Pighius in book iv., chap. 3, of the " Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy."

' The fourth, which lies between these extremes, is,
that the Pontiff, whether personally he can be a
heretic or no, cannot, in any event, define anything
heretical to be believed by the whole Church. " This
is the most common opinion of nearly all Catholics,"
as S. Thomas says.

* Of these four opinions, the first is heretical : the
second not proprie heretical, for we see still that it
is tolerated in the Church; yet it appears to be
altogether erroneous, and proximate to heresy/

It is to be borne in mind that Bellarmine wrote
this before the Four Articles of 1682 had been framed
or censured.

c The third opinion is probable, but not certain.

4 The fourth opinion is most certain, and to be
asserted.' *

Bellarmine in later years reviewed his ' Contro-
versies/ and wrote of this point as follows : —

' This opinion is more rightly the common judgment
of Catholics ; for opinion implies uncertainty, and we
hold this judgment to be certain.' And again, 'I
said that the opinion of those who teach that infalli-
bility of judgment resides not in the Pope, but in
the General Council, is not plainly heretical, but
erroneous and proximate to heresy. We do not,
indeed, venture to pronounce that opinion plainly
heretical, because they who follow it have, neither
they nor their books, been condemned by the Church.
Nevertheless, it seems to us so manifestly erroneous,
that it may deservedly be declared by the judgment
of the Church to be heretical.'

In the Pastoral of 1867, 1 gave a number of quota-
tions by which the strange misconceptions or misin-
terpretations of objectors are sufficiently precluded.

The words ex cathedra exclude all acts of the Pontiff
as a private person or as a private Doctor, and con-
fine the character of infallibility to those acts which

* Bellarm. Controv. de Summo Pontif. lib. iv. cap. 2.

are promulgated from the Chair of supreme authority
as Universal Doctor of the Church in faith and morals.

We have been lately told, by those who desire to
hinder the definition of this doctrine by secular oppo-
sition rather than by theological reason, that there
are some twenty opinions as to the conditions re-
quired to authenticate an utterance of the Pontiff ex
cathedrd. I will therefore venture to affirm that no
other conditions are required than this: That the
doctrinal acts be published by the Pontiff, as Univer-
sal Teacher, with the intention of requiring the assent
of the Church.*

This, then, is the opinion which, in the following
pages, we shall exclusively intend by the terms ex
cathedrd.

It will be observed that the fourth Gallican Article
differs from all the above-cited opinions, inasmuch as
it asserts that the judgments of the Eoman Pontiff in
matters of faith are not irreformable, unless the assent
of the Church — that is, either congregated or dispersed,
either previously or subsequently — shall adhere to
them.

The Gallicans maintained the infallibility of the
See of Peter, but not the infallibility of his Successor.

The tradition of the Church, while it refuses to

* This cannot be better expressed than in the words of F. Franzelin,
Professor of Dogmatic Theology in the Roman College :— ' Sive Con-
cilio sive Pontifici infallibilitatis charisma competit, quando et qua-
tenus, ut divinitus constitutes magister Ecclesiae, intendit definitive
sententia docere Ecclesiam universam auctoritate postulante consensum
in veritatem propositam.

' Locutio ex cathedrd nihil est aliud quam descripta propositio
authentica doctrine. Quid enim est cathedra apostolica nisi snpre-
mum authenticum magisterium pro universa Ecclesia ? '

separate the See from the Successor of Peter, affirms
the identity, and therefore the infallibility, of both.

In order to narrow the question, I may add that
no one now contends for the necessity of General
Councils. The framers of the Four Articles of 1682
were too intelligent to contend that the assent of the
Church congregated in Council is necessary to an
infallible declaration of the Pontiff. They contended
only for the consent of the Church dispersed. But
it will be difficult for them to show that such an
opinion is to be found in the tradition of the Church.
It is the inversion of the immemorial belief and prac-
tice of the Church. It will not be difficult to show,
even in the narrow limits of a Pastoral, that the tra-
dition of the Church is not to test the teaching of the
Pontiffs by the assent of the Church, but to take the
doctrine of the Pontiffs as the test of the doctrine
of the Church. The Head spoke for the whole Body,
and the utterances of the Head were the evidence of
what the Body believed and taught. It can hardly
be necessary to add that, in order to constitute an
article of faith, two conditions are necessary, the one
intrinsic, the other extrinsic : the former, that the
doctrine to be defined be contained in the divine
revelation ; the latter, that it be proposed to us by
the Church as revealed.

If there be anything for which the whole tradition
of the Church bears witness, it is to the stability in
faith of the See and of the Successor of Peter.

If there be anything not yet defined which is
nevertheless proposed, as of divine certainty, by the
constant tradition of the Church, both dispersed and

congregated, it is that the Roman Church and Pontiff
are by divine ordinance an infallible authority in in-
terpreting the faith and expounding the law of God.

It is obviously impossible now to do more than trace
the outline of the subject ; but this I will endeavour
to do, and to point out that this doctrine in question
has already passed through the historical periods
which mark its progress towards a final definition.

For example, let us first look at the history of the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, This truth
was fully but implicitly contained in the universal
belief of the Church, both east and west, as to the ab-
solute sinlessness and pre-eminent sanctification of the
Mother of God. This constituted the first period
of unanalysed belief. The doctrine was thus com-
memorated, year by year, in the Festival of the 'Ayiaa--
]u,oV, or the ' Sanctificatio ' of the Blessed Virgin.
The second period was one of analysis, forced upon the
Church by the Pelagian heresy, and arising also from
the legitimate and inevitable intellectual action of the
faithful upon the matter of faith. The Festival of the
Sanctification of the Blessed Virgin legitimately
became the festival of the Immaculate Nativity. The
third period was the period of definition, in which the
two opinions of the Immaculate Nativity and the
Immaculate Conception contended together, till the
one was continually so weakened as to lose all proba-
bility, the other was so confirmed as to become certain.
The Immaculate Conception was then, at last, defined
and proposed as a doctrine of revelation and an article
of faith.

The doctrine of the infallibility of the Church,

though not as yet defined, is everywhere declared in
the whole history of Christianity. It has likewise its
distinct periods, steadily advancing to a definition.
But it will be seen that the infallibility of the visible
Head of the Church is intrinsically necessary to the
infallibility of the Church. The same periods of
simple belief, of analysis, and of definition may be
traced. The first, in which the belief of the infalli-
bility of the Church and of the Pontiff pervaded
all the world, both east and west. This belief was
not only professed but reduced to practice in the
public action of the Church; and in every public
and authoritative instance on record the infalli-
bility of the Church is declared to rest upon the
stability in faith of the Roman Church, or of the
See of Peter, or of the Apostolic See, or of the
Successor of the Apostle, or of the Voice of Peter,
still teaching by his Successor in his See. The 'praxis'
of the Church — that is, its immemorial, universal, and
invariable procedure in the declaration of faith and
the condemnation of error — implies and demands
always as its motive the stability in faith of the
Roman See, and in almost all cases explicitly declares
it. This period extends from the beginning to the
time immediately preceding the Council of Constance.
The second period is, as before, one of contention and
analysis, in which Occam, John of Paris, Marsilius of
Padua, Nicholas de Clemangiis, Gerson, Peter d'Ailly,
and others of less note, began to distinguish and to
deny what had till then been always implicitly or ex-
plicitly believed. What they began in France was
afterwards fostered by the jealousy of parliaments,

jurists, and Jansenists. The declaration of 1682 is
no more than a mere modern refinement of the same
doctrine, rude and inchoate at first, afterwards re-
duced to system and expression. It is to be borne in
mind that the Articles of 1682, if they deny the in-
fallibility of the Pope, do not affirm the fallibility of
the Roman Church and See. The distinction ' inter
sedem, et in ed sedentem,' is carefully guarded even
by Gallicans. Instinct told them that to deny the
infallibility of the Roman See was to deny the infal-
libility of the Church, and to depart from the whole
praxis of the Church for the first sixteen centuries.
The third period may be said to begin from
1682, in which the denial of the infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff was first enunciated in a formula. It
opened the period of definition. The contests between
those who maintained the Immaculate Nativity and
those who maintained the Immaculate Conception led
to a closer and more scientific analysis, from which
two things have resulted : first, the elimination of
the doctrine of the Immaculate Nativity as inadequate
and erroneous; and secondly, the definition of the
Immaculate Conception. So, also, the contests be-
tween those who maintain the infallibility of the
Church, but reject the infallibility of the Roman Pon-
tiff, have already resulted in an analysis of the whole
subject of the divine certainty of faith, and the divine
order by which the faith is preserved and propounded
in the world; and from this will likewise follow in
due time — whether now or hereafter, it is not for us
to say — two consequences : first, the elimination of the
doctrine of 1682 as inadequate and erroneous ; and

secondly, a definition of the Infallibility of the Church,
embodied in its immemorial and universal praxis,
of which the stability of the faith of Peter, both
in his See and in his Successor, is the primary and
necessary condition. And as in the history of the
Immaculate Conception a series of Pontifical prohibi-
tions rendered less probable and less tenable the
opposing doctrine, till the former prevailed and
was solemnly defined, so with the infallibility of the
Church and its Head.

First. In 1479 the proposition 'that the Church of
the City of Rome may err/ was condemned in Peter
de Osma by the Archbishop of Toledo as heretical ;
and this condemnation was confirmed in a bull by
Sixtus IV.*

Secondly. The Articles of 1682 have been cen-
sured by Innocent XI., Alexander VIII., Inno-
cent XII., and Pius VI., in the condemnation of the
Synod of Pistoia.

Lastly. The proposition ' that the authority of the
Roman Pontiff over (Ecumenical Councils, and of his
infallibility in questions of faith, is futile, and has been
often refuted/ was condemned in 1688 by Alexander
VIII.

We will first take so much evidence as the narrow
limits of this Letter will allow, of the statement that,
from the beginning of Christianity down to the times
immediately preceding the Council of Constance —
that is, for fourteen hundred years — the doctrine of
the stability of the faith of Peter in his See and in

* Aguirre, Defensio Cathedrae S. Petri, tract, i. disp. xv. 45 ;
and Roskovany, Romaims Pontifex, &c.? torn. i. 630. Neitria. 1869.

his Successor was in possession, by the immemorial
and universal tradition of the Church. From this it
follows that they who deny it are innovators; that
they who affirm the infallibility of the Pontiff, speak-
ing ex cathedrd, to be a novelty recently introduced,
are, in the form of their argument, fighting in rank
with those who affirm the doctrine of Transubstantia-
tion to be an innovation of the Council of Lateran,
and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity an innovation
of the Council of Nicsea.

I will, however, invert the usual order in which the
evidence is adduced. We will begin, not with the
early centuries, but with the later. Even our oppo-
nents tell us that Ultramontanism, since the Council
of Constance, has possessed itself of Christendom.
It is undeniable, then, that for the last four hundred
years it has pervaded the theology and practice of the
Church.

We will therefore trace up the stream towards the
fountain. We shall be able thereby to see, before the
Council of Constance, what doctrine was in possession ;
whether any change is afterwards traceable. We
shall thereby be able to appreciate the claims of Galli-
canism to antiquity, authority, and truth.

In order to put beyond question that, for the last
four hundred and fifty years, the belief of the infalli-
bility of the Roman See and Pontiff has been com-
pletely in the ascendent, it may be well to call to
mind certain facts.

1. First, it is admitted that the doctrine of the
infallibility of the Roman Pontiff has been taught by
the Roman Pontiffs, the Roman theologians, the

E 2

Theological Schools of all countries, excepting France,
from the Council of Constance,* in 1418, to this day :
that is to say, for four centuries and a half it has been
the doctrine of all the religious orders, and eminently
of the Dominicans, the Franciscans, and of the Society
of Jesus ; of all Theological Schools, excepting the one
before named; and even of almost all universities.
Is it credible that all these representatives of the
learning and science of the Church should have erred,
and all erred alike, in elaborating a novelty unknown
to the Church till then?

2. During these four centuries and a half three
(Ecumenical Councils, of Florence, Lateran, and Trent,
have been held, and not so much as a whisper of doubt
as to the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was heard
in them.

3. During these same centuries, three (Ecumenical
Councils have touched upon the authority of the
Roman Pontiff, and they did so in these words.
The Council of Florence in 1439 decreed: — 'We
define, that the Roman Pontiff is Successor of
Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and true Vicar
of Christ, and the Head of the whole Church, and the
Father and Doctor of all Christians ; and to him in
Blessed Peter was delivered, by our Lord Jesus Christ,

* The Council of Constance had not the question of infallibility
before it. In affirming that a Council was superior to the Pope, c in his
qu£e pertinent ad fidem,' it did not declare the Pope to be fallible. And
even those words were resisted, not only by Cardinal Zarabella, but by
the Cardinals and Ambassadors of France. Moreover, they were the
act of only a part of one Obedience, in the midst of disorder and
irregularity which would suffice to annul them, even if Martin V.
had not carefully excluded them from his confirmation.

the plenary power of feeding, ruling, and governing
the Universal Church.'*

The Council of Lateran, in 1520, condemned as
heretical the proposition ' the Roman Pontiff, the
Successor of Peter, is not the Yicar of Christ consti-
tuted by Christ Himself in Blessed Peter over all the
Churches of the whole world. 'f

The Council of Trent in four places describes the
Roman Church as i Ecclesiarum omnium Mater et
Magistral J But the word 'Magistra' signifies the
authority of teacher and guide.

Lastly. The Council of Constance itself gives an
evidence of the Pontifical authority of the most
decisive kind, In the last session of the Council, the
Poles, because the Pope would not condemn a certain
book, appealed to a future General Council. Martin
V., therefore, in a public Consistory on March 10,
1418, condemned all such appeals. Gerson wrote
against this condemnation, which runs in these
words ; 4 It is lawful to no one to appeal from the
Supreme Judge, namely, the Apostolic See, or the
Roman Pontiff, the Yicar of Jesus Christ on earth,
or to reverse his judgment in causes of faith, which,
as causai majores, are to be referred to him and the
Apostolic See. '|| It cannot be unlawful to appeal from
a fallible to an infallible Judge. But a General Coun-
cil is infallible. The Pope, therefore, is not fallible.
This proves two things : the one, what was the claim of

* Labbe, Concil. xviii. p. 526. Ed. Ven. 1732.
f Ibid. xix. p. 1052.

J Concil. Trid. Sess. vii. De Bapt. 3 ; Sess. xiv. De Ex. Unct. 3 ;
Sess. xxii. 8 ; Sess. xxv. cent., De delect, cibortim, &c.
|| Gersonii Opp. torn. ii. p. 303. Ed. Antverp. 1706,

the Pontiff in the Council of Constance ; the other, how
little that Council was swayed by the errors of Gerson.

I. TEADITION FROM THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE TO
THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON.

But we are told that no one denies the rise of this
opinion from the time of the Council of Constance.
This, then, is one point of departure; and we will
proceed to examine what was the faith of the Church
before that date, ascending towards the source.

1. The first and least suspicious witness will be
Gerson himself. He says, adulation 4 concedes [to
the Pope] that he is above law, and that it is no way
possible that appeal be made from him, nor that he
be called into judgment; nor that obedience be
withdrawn from him, except in case of heresy. He
alone can make articles of faith ; he alone can deal
with questions of faith, and the causce major •&§; he
alone, as has just been done, makes definitions, rules,
laws, and canons; otherwise all that is defined, de-
creed, framed, or ordained by others is null and void.
Nor can anything ordained by him be in any way
whatsoever cancelled or annulled except by him alone ;
but he is bound by no constitution made by any
whomsoever. If I am not deceived, before the celebra-
tion of the holy Council of Constance this tradition had
so possessed the minds of many pedants rather than
lettered men, that any one who should have dogmatically
taught the opposite would have been noted and con-
demned for heretical pravityS* But how should this be

* Gersonii Opp. torn. ii. p. 247. Ed. Ant. 1706.

if the communis sensus fidelium were not united
against the dogmatiser? What bishop would have
allowed or have passed such a sentence against him,
unless the whole Episcopate had been united in the
contrary principles and instincts? 4 This tradition,'
as Gerson calls it, could have had no authority, nor
even existence as a tradition, if it had not been the
immemorial and widespread belief of men. Adula-
tion may make schools and cliques ; it cannot make
a tradition. The tradition was fatal to the novel
opinions of Gerson and his master; and he solaced
himself, like all innovators, in aspersing his brethren.
Now, if any one can produce evidence to show that in
this Gerson was wrong, and that evidence is to be
found before his time of the denial of the infallibility
of the See and Successor of Peter, let it be produced,*
and it will be fairly examined. The infallibility of
the Vicar of Jesus Christ is in possession. It is for
those who deny it to dislodge it if they can.

I will now take other evidence : and as far as
possible from the public acts of Synods or of Epis-
copates. The few individual witnesses I shall quote
will be those whose names have an exceptional weight.

2. When, in 1314, the King of France was endea-

* Theoph. Raynaud, torn. xx. p. 389, Cracov. 1669, sums up
the question in these words: — 'It were in vain to bring to-
gether a number of theologians, since all may be adduced who
lived before the Council of Constance. For this truth [the in-
fallibility of the Roman Pontiff] was never called into controversy
among Catholics before the time of the Councils of Bale and Con-
stance. But all who went before unanimously taught that the defi-
nitions of Pontiffs, even without a General Council, made matter of
faith, and that every judgment of faith belonged ultimately to the
Holy See.' See also the whole of section xi.

vouring to compel Clement V. to declare his prede-
cessor Boniface VIII. to be heretical, the French
bishops, in an address to the Pope, speak thus : l It is
no question of the heresy of a Pope, as Pope, but as
a private person. For as Pope he could not be heretical,
but only as a private person: for never was any Pope
a heretic as Pope.'*

3. The University of Paris, in 1387, addressed
Clement VII., whom they recognised as Pope at Avi-
gnon, and by the mouth of the same Peter d' Ailly who
afterwards so strangely deviated from truth: 'We
unanimously protest, that whatsoever hitherto has been
done in this matter by them [the University], and
whatsoever in the same, either now or at any other time,
we may do or say in their behalf, we humbly submit
altogether to the correction and judgment of the Apos-
tolic See and of the Supreme Pontiff who sits in it,
saying with blessed Jerome, u This is the Faith, most
blessed Father, which we have learned in the Catholic
Church ; in which, if we have laid down anything less
wisely or cautiously than we ought, we ask to be cor-
rected by thee, who boldest the Faith and the See of
Peter." For we are not ignorant, but most firmly hold
and in no way doubt, that the Holy Apostolic See is
that Chair of Peter upon which, as the same Jerome
witnesses, the Church is founded. ... Of which See,
in the person of Peter the Apostle sitting in it, was
said, " Peter, I have prayed for thee, that thy faith
fail not." It is to this, then, that the determination
of Faith, and the approbation of Catholic Truth, and

* Theolog. Wirceburg. torn. i. p. 373. Paris, 1852.

the condemnation of heretical impiety, above all,
belongs.' *

4. The Bishop and Theologians of Paris had cen-
sured certain opinions of S. Thomas in 1277. When
S. Thomas was canonised, in 1324, Stephen, Bishop
of Paris, withdrew the censure, in union with the
Dean and Chapter and sixty-three Masters and Bache-
lors in Theology : in so doing he calls ' the Holy
Roman Church the Mother of all the faithful and
Teacher of faith and truth, founded on the most firm
confession of Peter, Yicar of Christ; to which, as to
the universal Rule of Catholic Truth, belongs the
approbation of doctrines, the solution of doubts, the
determination of what is to be held, and the con-
futation of errors.' f

In these two passages we have the testimony of
the Bishop, Chapter, Theologians, and University of
Paris in the century before the Council of Constance.

5. What was at that time taught in Paris was
taught in England. Thomas Bradwardine, Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, who died in 1349, in the pre-
face to his book c De Causa Dei,' says : c I know
what I will do ; I will commit myself to that ship
which can never perish, the ship of Peter. For in it
our only Head and Master Christ in safety sat and
taught : to teach us mystically that in the boat of
Peter, the Church of Rome,- the authority and teach-
ing (magisterium) of all Christian doctrine should
abide. To the judgment, therefore, of so authentic
and so great a teacher I submit, and subject fully and

* Inter Gersonii Opp. torn. i. p. 702. Antverp. 1706.

f D'Argentre, Coll. Judic. torn i. p. 1, p. 222. Ed. Paris, 1728.

altogether myself and my writings, now and here-
after.'*

6. Clement VI., in 1351, writing to the Armenian
Patriarch, says : ' If thou hast believed, and dost still
believe, that the Roman Pontiff alone, when doubts
arise concerning the Catholic Faith, can by an au-
thentic determination, to which we must inviolably
adhere, make an end of them ; and that whatsoever
he, by the authority of the Keys delivered to him by
Christ, determines as true, is true and Catholic ; and
what he determines to be false and heretical is so to
be regarded, 'f Clement here plainly requires the
Armenians to believe the infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff as a truth of revelation.

7. It would be endless to quote from S. Thomas,
but these few words will suffice : ' Therefore the Lord
said to Peter, whom He made Supreme Pontiff, " I
have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not,
and thou, when thou art converted, confirm thy breth-
ren." And of this the reason is, that the faith of the
whole Church must be One . . . which cannot so be
kept unless questions of faith be determined by him
who presides over the whole Church ; so that his
sentence be held firmly by the whole Church.' J And
again : 4 And while in other parts there is either no
faith, or it is mingled with many errors, the Church
of Peter both is fresh in faith and pure from error :
and no wonder, because the Lord said, u I have
prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not." ' §

* Bradwardini de Causa Dei, Praef. !Ed. Lond. 1618.

f Baronius, torn. xxv. ad annum 1351, p. 529. Ed. Luc. 1750.

} Summa, sec. 2^ qu«st. i. art. 10. Ed. Ven. 1593.

§ Opuscula vi. In Symbol. Apost. Opp. torn. xvii. p. 70. Ed. Ven.

Now we may, without hesitation, take S. Thomas as
the witness of what was taught both by the Dominican
Order and by the schools of the Church in the century
before the Council of Constance.

8. S. Bonaventure, in like manner, will represent
the Franciscan Order: 'Peter, named from the Rock,
was by the Lord placed as the foundation of the
Church: " Thou art Peter, &c." Rabanus says that
all the faithful throughout the world may understand
that whosoever separate themselves in any way from
the unity of his faith or of his communion can
neither be absolved from the bonds of sin, nor can
enter the gate of the kingdom of heaven. Therefore
the Lord gave to Peter extraordinary powers over all
the Apostles in the words, "And thou, when thou
art converted, confirm thy brethren." ' * Again, he
says : ' If, in the time of the figurative priest, it was
sin to oppose the sentence of the Pontiff, much more
in the time of the revealed truth and grace, when it
is known that the plenitude of power is given to the
Vicar of Christ, is it sin, no way to be tolerated in
Faith or morals, to dogmatise contrary to his defini-
tion, by approving what he reproves, building up
again what he destroys, and defending what he
condemns.' f

9. The Council of Lyons in 1274 drew up a form
of profession to be made per modum juramenti by
the Greeks in the following words : ' The Holy Roman
Church has supreme and full primacy and principality

* S. Bonav. In Expos. Reg. Fratrum Minorum, cap. i. torn. vii.
p. 332. Ronue, 1596.

f Ibid. In Apol. Pauperttm, respon. i. cap. i. p. 413.

over the Universal Church, which it truly and humbly
acknowledges itself to have received from the Lord
Himself in Blessed Peter, the Prince and Head of the
Apostles, with plenitude of power. And as before
all others it is bound to defend the truth, so also if
any questions arise concerning the faith, they ought
by its judgment to be defined. . . . And to the same
all Churches are subject, and to it the prelates of the
same render obedience and reverence. But to this
[Church] the plenitude of power so belongs that it
admits the other Churches to a participation of its
care. . . By mouth and heart we confess that
which the Sacred and Holy Koman Church truly
holds, and faithfully teaches and preaches.'

The formula, which is inscribed Sacramentum
Grcecorum, runs as follows : —

'I, N., recognise the unity of faith which I have
subscribed ... as the True, Holy, Catholic Faith;
I accept it and confess it with heart and mouth ; and
I promise that I will inviolably preserve the same as
the Holy Koman Church holds, faithfully teaches and
preaches ; and in the same I will always persevere ;
nor at any time will I depart from it, nor in any way
deviate or differ from it.' *

If any one, with these facts and testimonies before
him, can continue to affirm, that the Articles of 1682
have any foundation in the two centuries before the
Council of Constance, or that the doctrine now cap-
tiously and invidiously styled Ultramontane is a
novelty, he is bound to bring, what as yet has not
been offered, some evidence of his assertion.

* Labbe, Concil. torn. xiv. p. 512. 513. Ed. Ven. 1731.

10. For the twelfth century we have two wit-
nesses, both Saints; one a confessor, the other a
martyr, and both our own : S. Thomas of Canter-
bury, and S. Anselm.

S. Thomas writes to the Bishop of Hereford:
' The fountain of Paradise is one, but divided into
many streams, that it may water the whole earth.
Who doubts that the Church of Rome is the head of
all the Churches, and the fountain of Catholic truth?
Who is ignorant that the keys of the kingdom of hea-
ven were entrusted to Peter ? Does not the structure
of the whole Church rise from the faith and doctrine
of Peter ? . . . Whosoever he be that waters or plants,
God gives increase to none, save to him who has
planted in the faith of Peter, and rests in his doctrine.'
Again he says of the Apostolic See : ' From this none
but infidels, or heretics, or schismatics withdrew their
faith and obedience.' *

11. S. Anselm, in dedicating his book on the Holy
Trinity to the Pope, writes : ' Forasmuch as the pro-
vidence of God has chosen your Holiness, to commit
to your custody the life and faith of Christians, and
the government of His Church, to no other can refer-
ence be more rightly made, if so be anything contrary
to the Catholic faith arise in the Church, that it
may be corrected by his authority; nor to any other
can anything which may be written against such
errors be more safely submitted, that by his pru-
dence it may be examined.' f Again : c Let those who

* S. Thomae Epist. Ixxiv. ad Suffraganeos, p. 167 ; Ep. cxxiv. ad
Robertuni Heref. p. 277. Ed. Oxon. 1844.

t S. Anselmi de Fide Trin. Dedic. p. 41. Ed. Ben. Paris, 1721.

despise the Christian decrees of the Vicar of Peter,
and in him the decrees of Peter and of Christ, seek
for other gates of the kingdom of heaven ; for cer-
tainly they shall not enter in by those, the keys of
which the Apostle Peter bears.'*

If Saints and Martyrs do not represent the mind
of the Church, where shall we seek it ?

12. S. Bernard writes to Pope Innocent : ' It is
right to refer to your Apostleship whatsoever danger
and scandal may arise in the kingdom of God ;
especially those which touch the faith. For I judge it
to be fitting that the injuries of the faith should there
be repaired, where the faith cannot fail. For this in
truth is the prerogative of that See. For to what
other was it ever said, "I have prayed for thee,
Peter, that thy faith fail not?" Therefore, what
follows is required of Peter's Successor; "andthou,
when thou art converted, confirm thy brethren." ' f

13. In the same century, that is in the year 1149,
Anselm, Bishop of Havelburgh, was sent by the
Emperor Lothaire to Constantinople. He there held
public disputations with Nechites, Archbishop of
Nicomedia, on the errors of the Greeks. By the
desire of Eugenius III., he afterwards put these dis-
putations in writing. It will be borne in mind that
Anselm was German by birth, and therefore a repre-
sentative of a country remote from Koman influences.
He was endeavouring also to win the Greeks from
their errors, of which one was the denial of the pre-

* Ibid. Epist. ad Humbertum. Lib. iii. 65, p. 391.
| S. Bernard, ad Innoc. P. Ep. cxci. torn. iv. p. 433. Ed. Paris,
1742.

rogatives of the See of Peter, both in jurisdiction
and in faith. Anselm had every inducement to
reduce to the narrowest limit the doctrines necessary
to reconciliation. As the representative of the
Catholic Church, to the separated East he spoke as
follows : c The holy Koman Church, chosen before
all others by the Lord, has been endowed and blessed
by him with a special privilege ; and by a certain
prerogative stands pre-eminent, and by a divine right
has an excellence before all Churches. For while
other Churches at divers times have been possessed
by various heretics, and have wavered in the Catholic
faith, that [Church], founded and consolidated upon
the Eock, has always remained unshaken, and never,
by any false and sophistical arguments of heretics,
has been drawn away from the simplicity of the faith
held by Simon Barjona; because it has always been
defended by the shield of divine wisdom, through
the grace of the Lord, against deceitful controversies.
For it has never been shaken by any terror of
emperors, or mighty ones of this world, because
by the strength of the Lord, and the shield of a
strong patience, it has always been secure against
all assaults. Wherefore the Lord, [knowing] that
other Churches would be greatly harassed by the
inroads of heresy, and that the Eoman Church,
which He had founded upon the Rock, would never
be weakened in the faith, said to Peter, " I have
prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not; and
thou, when thou art converted, confirm thy brethren."
As if He had openly said : " Thou who hast received
this grace, that while those are shipwrecked in faith,

thou abidest always in faith immovable and con-
stant, confirm and correct those that waver ; and as
the provider, and doctor, and father, and master,
have care and solicitude for all." * He rightly, there-
fore, received the privilege of being set over all, who
received from God the privilege, before all, of pre-
serving the integrity of faith.' Again he said:
' Why do you not rather receive the statutes of the
Holy Roman Church, which by God, and from God,
and in the next place after God, has obtained the
primacy of authority in the Universal Church, which
is spread throughout the whole world? For so we
read that it was declared concerning it in the first
Council of Nicaea by three hundred and eighteen
Fathers. For it must be known, and no Catholic
can be ignorant of it, that the Holy Roman Church
was preferred before others by no decrees of Synods,
but that it obtained the primacy by the voice of
our Lord and Saviour in the Gospel, where He said
to Blessed Peter, a Thou art Peter, and upon this
Rock,"' &c.f Now this is language which, at the
present day, would be called Ultramontane ; but
Anselm so addresses the Greeks in a perfect con-
sciousness that he spoke the mind of the Catholic
Church. And what he spoke, he wrote, as we have
seen, by the command of Eugenius III. Not a trace
is to be found that these words of Anselm were not
a true expression of the immemorial and universal
tradition of the Church in his day.

14. The Synod of Quedlinburgh, in Saxony, in 1085,

* D'Achery, Spicilegium, torn, i, 194. Ed. Paris, 1723.
f Ibid.

condemned what was called the Henrician heresy:
namely, that not only temporal but spiritual things
are subject to emperors and kings. In the Acts of
the Synod we read : c When all were seated accord-
ing to their order, the decrees of the Holy Fathers
concerning the Primacy of the Apostolic See were
produced : namely, that it is allowed to none to
revise its judgment, and to sit in judgment upon
what it has judged; which, by the public profession
of the whole Synod, was approved and confirmed/ *

15. In the ninth century, that is in 863, a Council
in Rome decreed as follows : — ' If anyone shall de-
spise the dogmas, commandments, interdicts, sanc-
tions or decrees, in respect to Catholic faith, eccle-
siastical discipline, correction of the faithful, the
amendment of sinners, or the prevention of impending
or future evils, wholesomely promulgated by him who
presides in the Apostolic See, let him be anathema.' f

16. This canon was recognised in the eighth Gene-
ral Council, held at Constantinople in 869 ; so that
the final and irreformable authority of the Roman
Pontiff was recognised and declared under pain of
deposition for clergy, and of excommunication for
the laity until penitent.J

17. In the eighth century Alcuin writes to the
faithful in Lyons : ' Let no Catholic dare to contend
against the authority of the Church. And lest he be
found to be a schismatic and not a Catholic, let him
follow the approved authority of the Holy Roman

* Labbe, Concil. torn. xii. pp. 679, 680. Ed. Yen. 1730.
f Labbe, Concil. torn. x. p. 238. Ed. Ven. 1730.
j Labbe, Concil. ibid. p. 633.

Church/* In the Caroline books — whether they
be by Charlemagne or Alcuin — we read of the
Eomaii Church that, as Peter was set over all the
Apostles, so Eome is set over all the Churches.
'For this Church is set over all the rest by no
decrees of Synods, but holds its primacy by the au-
thority of the Lord Himself, who said, " Thou art
Peter," &c. . . . Whence it is to be understood that
holy and learned men in all parts of the world,,
shining with the light of teaching and science, not
only have not departed from the Holy Roman Church,,
but also, in time of need, have implored help from it,
for the corroboration of the faith ; which, as we have
already said and proved by examples, all members of
the Catholic Church ought, as a rule, to do ; so as to
seek from it [the Roman Church], next after Christy
help to defend the faith: which [Church], not having
spot or wrinkle, both sets its foot upon the monstrous
heads of heresy, and confirms the minds of the faith-
ful in the faith. 'f

This testimony, by the way, is important for those
who believe that Charlemagne imposed on the Roman
Pontiff the insertion of the ' Filioque ' in the Creed.

We have now reached the eighth century of the
Church, before the separation of the Greeks, and
while as yet they acknowledged the supreme autho-
rity, both in jurisdiction and of faith, of the See of
Peter. The Greeks acknowledge the second Council
of Nicaea as infallible, and in that Synod the letters

* Alcuin, Opp. in Patrologia, Migne, torn. c. col. 293. Paris, 1857.
t Carol. M. Opp. in Patrologia, Migne, torn, xcviii. col. 1020, 21.
Paris, 1851.

of Hadrian to Tarasius, Bishop of Constantinople,
were read and approved. In those letters Hadrian
says, 'Whose (Peter's) See shines forth in primacy
over the whole Church, and is Head of all the
Churches of God. Wherefore the same Blessed Peter
the Apostle, governing the Church by the command
of the Lord, left nothing uncared for, but held every-
where, and holds, supreme authority (expaTyc-e TTOLV-
TOTS xai xparei TTJV dpxw).' Hadrian then requires
Tarasius to adhere to our 'Apostolic See, which is the
Head of all Churches of God, and in profound sincerity
of mind and heart to guard the sacred and orthodox
form' [of faith]. The whole Synod cried out in
acclamation, 4 The Holy Synod so believes, so is
convinced, so defines.' *

18. The African Bishops, in 646, addressed a
Synodical letter to Pope Theodore, which letter was
read and approved in the Lateran Council of 649,
under Martin I. ' No one can doubt,' they say, c that
there is in the Apostolic See for all Christians a
fountain, great and unfailing, abundant in its waters,,
from which the streams go forth copiously to irri-
gate the whole Christian world ; to which [See],
also in honour of Blessed Peter, the decrees of the
Fathers gave special veneration in searching out the
things of God, which ought by all means to be care-
fully examined ; and, above all, and justly by the
Apostolic Head of Bishops, whose care from of old
it is, as well to condemn evils as to commend the
things which are to be praised. For by the ancient
discipline it is ordained that whatsoever be done,
* Labbe, Concil. torn. viii. p. 771, 5. Ed. Ven. 1729.
r 2

even in provinces remote and afar off, shall neither
be treated of nor accepted, unless it be first brought
to the knowledge of your august See, so that a
just sentence may be confirmed by its authority, and
that the other Churches may thence receive the
original preaching as from its native source, and that
the mysteries of saving faith may remain in uncorrupt
purity throughout the various regions of the world.1 *

This declaration of the African Synod, being read
and approved in the first Council of Lateran, is there-
fore confirmed by its authority.

19. In the Pastoral of two years ago, I gave the
evidence of the Sixth General Council, held at Con-
stantinople in 680, in which the letter of Agatho
was received as the voice of Peter. In this letter,
addressed to the Emperor, after reciting the dogma
of faith, Agatho thus speaks of the Roman See :
4 Relying upon the protection [of Peter], this, his
Apostolic Church, has never deviated from the way
of truth in any way of error whatsoever; and his
[Peter's] authority, as that of the Prince of all the
Apostles, the whole Catholic Church of Christ and all
the universal Synods always and faithfully have in all
things embraced and followed. . . . For this is the rule
of the True Faith, which, both in prosperity and ad-
versity, this Apostolic Church of Christ, the Spiritual
Mother of your peaceful empire, holds and defends as
vital : which Church, by the grace of Almighty God,
will never be convicted of erring from the path of
apostolic tradition, nor has it ever yielded or been
depraved by heretical novelties; but as it received in
* Labbe, Concil. torn. vii. p. 131. Ed. Yen. 1729.

the beginning of the Faith' from its Founders, the
chief of the Apostles of Christ, it abides untainted to
the end, according to the divine promise of our Lord
and Saviour Himself, which in the Holy Gospels He
uttered to the Prince of His disciples : Peter, Peter,
behold, Satan hath desired to sift you as wheat : but I
have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. And thou,
when thou art converted, confirm thy brethren.1 *

It was to this that the Fathers answered in accla-
mation : 4 Peter hath spoken.7

On this evidence two things are to be observed :

First, that Agatho's declaration of the untainted
orthodoxy of the Apostolic See until his day refutes
the attempt of those who would fasten heresy on
Pope Honorius, his predecessor.

Next, that the Fathers so little distinguished
1 inter sedem et in ea sedentem,' that they identify
Agatho and the See as one and the same. They
address him w$ TrptoToQewa* <roi rr^g olxovpsvyg sxxhy-
(Tiag, STT] TTJV (rrspsav TrsTpav SO-T&TI. ' To thee, there-
fore, as the first See of the Universal Church, we
leave what is to be done,' &c.f

20. It may perhaps be said that the language of
Anselm of Havelburgh, quoted above, gives no proof
of the mind of the Eastern Church. I will therefore
add one more testimony, at a period when as yet

* Labbe, Concil. torn. vii. pp. 659, 662. Ed. Yen. 1729.

f Ibid. p. 1110. So S. Jerome: 'Ego Beatitudini tuse, id est
Cathedrae, consocior, ' Opp. torn. iv. P. 2, p. 19; and S. Prosper,
inter Opp. S. Aug. torn. x. App. p. 176, Paris, 1690 : ' Sacrosancta
Petri Sedes per universum orbem Papas Zosimi sic ore loquitur.'
S. Peter Damian writes to the Pope : ' Vos Apostolica Sedes, Vos
Komana estis Ecclesia.' Opp. torn. iii. p. 221.

the Greeks had not accomplished the schism which
endures to this day. This last evidence is contained
in the Profession of Faith which Pope Hormisdas, in
the year 517, required the Oriental Bishops to sign;
and they did sign it. We have, therefore, in an
authentic and public act, the response and accept-
ance, of the East, of the doctrinal authority of the
Apostolic See. It runs as follows : ' The Kule of
Faith. The first act of salvation is to keep rightly
the rule of faith, and in no way to deviate from the
decrees of the Fathers. And inasmuch as the words
of our Lord Jesus Christ cannot be passed over, who
said, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my Church," &c. . . . These words are con-
firmed by their effects, for in the Apostolic See
religion has been always preserved without spot/
Then follows a condemnation of heretics and of all in
communion with them. ' Wherefore we receive and
approve all the letters of Pope Leo, and all that he
wrote concerning the Christian religion. Therefore,
as we have said, following in all things the Apostolic
See, and professing all its decrees, I hope to be
worthy to be in that one communion with you which
the Apostolic See enjoins, in which is the perfect
and true solidity of Christian religion: promising
also that the names of those who are separated from
the communion of the Catholic Church, that is, those
who are not united in mind to the Apostolic See,
shall not be recited in the Holy Mysteries. This, my
profession, I have subscribed with my own hand, and
presented to thee, Hormisdas, Holy and Venerable
Pope of the City of Rome. — XV. Kal. April. Agapito

viro clarissimo Consule.' * This Profession of Faith
was signed, it is said, by 2,500 bishops, f

Another version of this formula is given by John,
Bishop of Constantinople, in a letter to Pope Hormis-
das. It runs almost in the same terms, but in two
passages it is even more explicit. After the words
of our Lord to Peter, it continues : ' These sayings
are confirmed by the effects, because in the Apostolic
See religion is always kept inviolate;' and afterwards
it concludes : ' But if in anything I should be tempted
to doubt in my profession, I declare, by my own
condemnation, that I myself should be partaker with
those whom I have condemned.' J

21. From the third Council of Constantinople in
the seventh century, which is received by the Greek
Church, we will pass to the Council of Chalcedon,
one of the four first General Councils received,
at least in profession, by Anglicans, in the fifth.
This brings us to the period of undivided unity, and
therefore, as they admit, of infallibility.

Now it is certain that S. Leo, in the most explicit
language, claimed for the See and for the Successor of
Peter an indefectible stability in faith. Two years ago
I quoted his testimony, which is abundantly sufficient
to prove this assertion. I will now add only two short

* Labbe, Concil. torn. v. p. 583. Ed. Ven. 1728.

f We have this on the authority of Rusticus, who wrote about
A,D. 546. He says that the faith was confirmed ' per libellos sacer-
dotum forsan duorum millium et quingentorum, imperante Justino,
post schisma Petri Alexandrini et Acacii Constantinopolitani. Eustici
S. R. E. Diac. Card. Contra Acephalos. Disp. Galland. Bibl. Max.
torn. xii. p. 75.

J Labbe, Concil. torn. v. p. 622. Ed. Ven, 1728.

passages. Preaching on the anniversary of his elec-
tion to the Pontificate, he says : ' Not only the Apos-
tolic, but also the Episcopal dignity of Blessed Peter
enters into our solemnity, and he never ceases to
preside over his See, and he has always an unfailing
fellowship with the Eternal Priest. For that solidity
which, when he was made the Rock, he received
from Christ the Rock, transmits itself to his heirs.'*
Again: ' The solidity of that faith, which is com-
mended in the Prince of the Apostles, is perpetual.'^
; If anything, therefore, is rightly done, or rightly
decided by us .... it is by the work and merits
of him whose power lives and whose authority is

supreme in his See For [the faith of Peter]

is divinely guarded by such a solidity that neither
has heretical pravity ever been able to violate, nor
heathen perfidy to overcome it.'J

It was with this consciousness of his commission
and prerogatives that S. Leo sent his Dogmatic
Letter to the Council of Chalcedon. He peremptorily
forbad, in his letter to the Emperor, that the doctrine
of faith should be discussed as if it were doubtful.
To the Fathers of the Council he wrote : ' Now I am
present by my vicars, and in the declaration of the
Catholic Faith I am not absent : so that you cannot
be ignorant what we believe by the ancient tradition,
you cannot doubt what is our desire; wherefore,
most dear brethren, let the audacity of disputing
against the divinely inspired Faith be altogether

* Opp. S. Leon. : In Anniv. Assump. Serm. v. 4. Ed. Ballerini,
1753.

f Ibid. Serm. iii. 2.
Ibid. Serm. iii. 3.

rejected, let the vain unbelief of those that err be
silenced. Let it not be allowed to any to defend
that which it is not allowed to believe. By the letters
which we addressed to Bishop Flavian, of blessed
memory, it has been most fully and clearly declared
what is the pious and sincere confession concerning
the mystery of the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus
Christ/*

After the Dogmatic Letter of Leo to Flavian had
been read, the bishops exclaimed, c This is the Faith of
the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Apostles. So
we all believe ; the orthodox so believe. Anathema
to those who do not so believe: Peter has spoken
by Leo.'f

In their letter to S. Leo the Fathers of the Council
declare that he has preserved for them the Faith, being
set as the interpreter of the voice of Blessed Peter
T7J£ TOU paxapiou Tlsrpov Qcuvijg sp^vsbs XOL^KTTOL-
; 'whence we also, using you as our leader in
what is good and profitable, have manifested to the
children of the Church the inheritance of truth.* . . .
Of themselves they say that he presided over them
as 'the head over the members' (cog xs^aAr) ^sXcoi/).
Finally, they pray him to honour by his sentence their
judgment (T/j«7)rov xau ra7$ <ra?£ ^$01$ TTJV xpicriv^.%
But this judgment, which related to the precedence of
Constantinople next after Rome, S. Leo cancelled and
annulled. The Legates protested. § S. Leo writes

* Opp. S. Leon. Epist. cxciii. p. 1069. Ed. Ball. 1753.

f Labbe, Concil. torn. iv. p. 1235.

j: Epist. S. Synod. Chalc. ad Leon. P. inter Opp. pp. 1088, 1090.

§ Ep. Marciani Imp. ad Leon. Papam, ibid. p. 1114.

to the Empress Pulcheria : c The agreement of the
bishops, contrary to the rules of the Holy Canons
made at Nicasa, the piety of your faith uniting with
us, we declare void, and, by the authority of Blessed
Peter the Apostle, by a general decree we altogether
cancel.'* S. Peter Chrysologus writes to Eutyches,
who had asked his judgment on his doctrine: 'In all
things I exhort you, honourable brother, that you
obediently attend to the things which have been
written by the blessed Pope of the City of Eome,
because Blessed Peter, who in his own See lives
and presides, offers the truth to those that seek it.
We therefore, for the love of peace and of faith, cannot
hear causes of faith without the consent of the Bishop
of the City of Rome.'f

And here we may stay our course. We have
reached the period of undivided unity, when all the
world looked to the See of Peter as the source of
supreme authority in jurisdiction and in faith. The
two keys of jurisdiction and of knowledge, intrin-
sically inseparable, are here visible in the hands
of Leo. The two great prerogatives of Peter,
* Feed my sheep,7 and 4 1 have prayed for thee that
thy faith fail not/ are as explicitly recognised in
the Council of Chalcedon as by us at this day. I
forbear to quote the testimony of individual Fathers.
S. Augustine and S. Optatus would give it in abun-
dance. But I have endeavoured to exhibit the tradition
of the Church in its public and authoritative prac-
tice. I think it undeniable that throughout all the

* Ad Pulcher. ibid. p. 1158, sec. 3.

f Ep. Petri Chrys. adEutychen, inter Opp. S. Leonis, ibid, p. 779.

ages we have been reviewing there was a constant,
universal, and unvarying tradition of the stability
of the faith in the See and the Successor of Peter ;
and this world-wide fact will give us the true interpre-
tation and value of the words of S. Irenaeus, 'Ad
hanc enim Ecclesiam, propter potiorem principalitatem,
necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam; in qua
semper ab his qui sunt undique, conservata est ab
Apostolis traditio.'*

If any one shall answer that these evidences do
not prove the infallibility of the Pope, speaking ex
cathedra, they will lose their labour.

I adduce them to prove the immemorial and uni-
versal practice of the Church in having recourse to
the Apostolic See as the last and certain witness and
judge of the divine tradition of faith. That they
prove this no one will, I think, deny. Even those
who imagine that Honorius was a heretic have
never ventured to incur the condemnation of Peter
de Osma, who affirmed that ' the Church of the
City of Rome may err/ Even the Gallicans of
1682 professed to believe the See to be infallible,
while they affirmed that he who sat in it was fallible.
Thus far, then, we have the line of testimonies run-
ning up from the Council of Constance to the fifth
century; that is, to the period of the four first
General Councils, when as yet the East and West
were united to the See and to the Successor of
Peter. The thought that either the See or the Suc-
cessor of Peter could fail in faith is not to be found
in those thousand years. With all the events of

* S. Iren. Adv. Heer., lib. iii. 2. sec. 21, note 27. Ed. Ven. 1734.

Honorius fresh* before them, the Fathers of the third
Council of Constantinople responded to Agatho's
declaration of the inviolate orthodoxy of the See and
the Successor of Peter. The East and the West
alike united in this. In the Formula of Hormisdas
we have even more than this. The Eoman Pon-
tiff imposed subscription on the Oriental bishops
of a profession of which the inviolate orthodoxy
of the See and of the Successor of Peter is the
explicit basis ; and the Oriental bishops obeyed and
subscribed. It will be observed, too, that they
did this in faith of the promise made to Peter.
Through those thousand years two texts are per-
petually present : ' On this rock I will build my
Church ; ' for the stability of the See. ' I have
prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not ; ' for the
stability of the Successor of Peter. It is to be
observed, also, that the evidences adduced are not,
with a few exceptions, the words of individual
bishops or doctors, however illustrious. They are
the decrees or declarations of Synods, of whole
Episcopates in Rome, Africa, France, Saxony. They
are the acts of General Councils, and, therefore,
public documents of the Universal Church. On this
evidence it may be affirmed, without hesitation, that
for the first fourteen hundred years — that is, till the

* I cannot refrain from adding, that we have positive historical
proof that Honorius did not err in faith. We have his two letters,
which are perfectly orthodox. In whatsoever sense the words of
the Council may be understood, they cannot be understood to accuse
Honorius of heresy, with the proof of his orthodoxy before us
under his own hand. Gonzalez, De Infall. Rom. Pontif., disp. xv.
sect. vi. § 1.

preludes of the great Western schism, and of the
Council of Constance — the praxis Ecclesice is definite
and undeniable, and that Gerson was right in saying
that any one who had ventured to deny the infalli-
bility of the See and of the Successor of Peter
would have been condemned for heresy.-

But if for heresy, in what light did the consent
of the faithful, and the tradition of the Church,
regard the truth denied ? The correlative of heresy
is faith.

This, then, is what may be regarded as the first
period of simple, traditional faith, immemorial and
universal, in the stability of the faith of Peter in his
See and in his Successor; which, when analysed, is
the infallibility of the Vicar of Jesus Christ.*

II. TRADITION FROM THE COUNCIL OF
CONSTANCE TO 1682.

We must here close the first period of this sub-

* It is with no little surprise, shared I believe by those who
have read the evidence from the fifteenth to the fifth century given
in this chapter, that I read in the book ' Janus,' which has caused
no little stir in Germany, the following words : — l For thirteen
centuries an incomprehensible silence on this fundamental article
(Papal Infallibility) reigned throughout the whole Church and her
literature. None of the antient confessions of faith, no Catechism,
none of the Patristic writings composed for the instruction of the
people, contain a syllable about the Pope, still less any hint that
all certainty of faith and of doctrine depends on him.' * The Pope and
the Council, by Janus,' p. 64. — The reader will judge whether an
incomprehensible silence reigned on the perpetual stability or inde-
fectibility of the Faith in the See and Successor of Peter, and whether
there be any difference between this and the infallibility of the Pon-
tiff. But these confident assertions may mislead thousands.

ject, which ends with the Council of Constance, and
enter upon the second, which reaches from that Council
to the Assembly of 1682. In this period, of about two
hundred and forty years, the authority of the Roman
Pontiff was far more explicitly manifested, by reason
of the efforts made to diminish its amplitude.
The Councils of Constance and Bale may be said
to have demanded the decree of the Council of
Florence. This explicit declaration precludes the dis-
tinction between the ' See and him that sits in it/
The Council affirms that the plenitude of all power
was given by our Lord not only to Peter, but, ipsi
in Beato Petro, to his Successor in Peter. This
decree is a summing up and declaration of the divine
tradition we have hitherto been tracing upwards,
century by century, towards its source. The second
period may^be called the period of contention, in which
the authority of the Roman Pontiff has been subjected
to a controversial analysis. Many things rendered
this inevitable. The revival of the Roman jurispru-
dence filled the princes and civil powers of Europe
with the principles and maxims of ancient Ca3sarism.*
They aimed at supreme and absolute power over
all persons and causes, ecclesiastical and civil. In the
Pontiffs they met their only obstacle ; the only anta-
gonist they could not break or bend. The pride of
nationality is easily roused, and they roused it as
an ally against the power of faith and the authority
of Rome.

A still more dangerous auxiliary soon ranged
itself on the same side.

* Bottalla, ' The Supreme Authority of the Pope/ p. 157 et seq.

The rise and rivalry of nationalities within the
unity of the Catholic Church, which first generated
controversies as to the supreme and final authority
of the Eoman Pontiff, soon led to divisions in the
Conclave, and to doubtful elections. At the time
of the Council of Constance the Church was dis-
tracted by three Obediences and three doubtful
Popes.

The Council, from its opening to its fourteenth
session, contained only one of the three Obediences.
The second Obedience then came in. It was not
until the thirty-fifth session that the three Obedi-
ences united, and a Pontiff of certain and canonical
election presided over it, as S. Leo over the Council
of Chalcedon, or S. Agatho over the third Council of
Constantinople.

But it was in the fourth and fifth sessions, while as
yet only one Obedience was present, that the decrees
which represent the novelties of Gerson were pro-
claimed. They were null from the beginning, from
the nullity of the assembly, the irregularity of the
voting, as well as the heterodoxy of the matter.
They were protested against as soon as read, and
let to pass, not only because opposition was vain, but
because their passing was, ip so facto, void of effect,
But into this it is needless to enter. So long as a
Gallican remains, the Gallican version of the Council
of Constance will be reiterated. It will be remem-
bered how Gerson complained of the condemnation,
by Martin V., of those who appealed from the Pope
to a General Council. This one Pontifical Act, pub-

lished in the Council itself, ruined the fourth and
fifth sessions from their base.

In order to appreciate correctly the real nature of
those sessions, we may recall to mind what were the
theological opinions taught at that time by Gerson,
in Paris. We shall readily see, first, of how little
weight is the authority of his name ; and next, how
analogous was the course of erroneous opinions in
France with that of the opinions which issued in
Anglicanism in this country.

The following propositions are a sample of much
to be found in his writings: —

4 The decision of the Pope alone, in matters which
are of faith, does not as such bind (any one) to
believe/*

'The decision of the Pope binds the faithful not
to dogmatise to the contrary, unless they see that
manifest error against faith, and great scandal to the
faith, would arise from their silence if they should not
oppose themselves. ... If persecution of their
opinions, and punishment should ensue against them,
let them know that they are blessed who suffer per-
secution for justice sake.' t

c A simple person, without authority, might be so
excellently learned in Holy Scripture that more
confidence is to be had in his assertion, in a doc-
trinal case, than in the declaration of the Pope; for
the Gospel is to be trusted rather than the Pope.'J

* Gersonii Opp. Ed. Dupin, Ant. 1706 : torn. i. De Exam. Doctr.
Consid. 2, p. 9.
t Ibid,
j Ibid. Con. 5, p. 11.

Bishops * in the primitive Church were of the same
power as the Pope.' *

'It is ridiculous to say that a mortal man may
claim to have power of binding and loosing sin,
in heaven and on earth, while he is a son of per-
dition,' &c. f

4 The Roman Church, the head of which is believed

to be the Pope may err, and

deceive and be deceived, and be in schism and
heresy, and fail to exist.' J

4 It appears that if the Pope . ... be wicked
and incorrigible, the King or Emperor of the
Romans .... has to apply the remedy by con-
voking a Council.' §

4 Bishops (oppressed by Popes) may reasonably
carry their complaints, not only to the Pope and a
General Council, which is the most fitting tribunal,
but to orthodox Princes.' ||

4 Here is a foundation for the possible case of sub-
traction or suspension of obedience to any Pope
rightly elected.' ^[

These are the first principles of the Anglican
schism, which has ' always justified itself by such
writers as Gerson, Peter d'Ailly, Nicholas de Cle-
mangiis, and by their later followers, Dupin, Van
Espen, and Febronius.

In quoting the opinions of Gerson, which every
Catholic must lament and reject, it would be unjust

* Tom. ii, De modis uniendi, p. 174.
t Ibid. p. 168. } Ibid. p. 163,

§ Ibid. p. 178.

|| Tom. ii. De Statu Eccl. p. 533.
f Tom. vi. De Auferib. Pap«, p. 218,
G

not to bear in mind the circumstances of the times,
which forced upon him and others questions alto-
gether new. Confidence in the supreme office of
the See and Successor of Peter, in matter of faith,
had been rudely shaken by the disputed election
of two and of three claimants to that supreme
power. Though it was not logical, it was only too
natural that the doubts should spread from the elec-
tion to the office, and that the contending Obediences
should endeavour not only to prevail over their
opponents, but to protect, as they thought, the
authority of the Church and the integrity of the
Faith from dangers inseparable from the co-existence
of two and three claimants to the supreme office of
Judge in doctrinal causes. A good and a prudent
motive can be supposed for this error. In deny-
ing the infallibility of the Pontiff, and in affirming
the infallibility of Councils, Gerson no doubt thought
to provide a broader and surer basis for the
faith of Christendom. So much it is but justice to
suppose. Nevertheless, his opinions are erroneous,
even to the verge of heresy, and have scattered the
seeds of a wide growth of heretical errors from that
day to this. It is no wonder that Protestants have
claimed Gerson as a forerunner and an authority.
Villiers, a Protestant writer, in his book called
4 Influence of the ^Reformation of Luther/ says that
Gerson and Eicher were the leaders of the religious
revolution in France.*

In the last analysis, the great Western schism is
no more than the rivalry and contention of Na-

* Bouix, De Papa .et de Concil, CEcum, torn. i. 493. Paris, 1869.

tionalities. What individuals have never been able
to effect against the unity and authority of the
Church, nations have endeavoured to do. And no
more luminous evidence can be found of the divine
stability of the Church, both in its unity and its
authority, than that it should have been able not
only to heal the great Western schism, but for four
hundred years to preserve both unity and authority
as it is at this day, and that, too, in the period of the
most vigorous and vehement development of modern
nationalities.

But to return to the thread of our subject. It is
certain that the opinions of Gerson soon lost their
hold, even in the Sorbonne. The Council of Florence
eighteen years afterwards, that is in 1439, effaced the
traces of the fourth and fifth sessions of the Council
of Constance by its well-known decree, which, if it
does not explicitly affirm the infallibility of the
See and of the Successor of Peter, implicitly and
logically contains it. That well-known decree is no
more than the final expression of the immemorial
and universal practice and faith of the Church by
the infallible authority of a General Council.

Forty years later, that is in 1479, the condemna-
tion of Peter cle Osma by Sixtus IV. affirms the
contrary of his error to be of faith, namely, 4 that the
Church of the City of Rome cannot err.'

In 1544 the Faculty of Louvain published two-and-
thirty Articles against the errors of Luther. The
twenty-first runs thus : —

4 It is to be held by firm faith that there is one
true and Catholic Church on earth, and that visible,

G 2

100

which was founded by the Apostles and endures to
our time, retaining and holding whatsoever the Chair
of Peter hath delivered, does deliver, or shall here-
after deliver, in faith and religion ; upon which [Chair,
the Church] is so built by Christ the Bridegroom, that
in those things which are of faith it cannot err/

The 25th Article runs: —

4 Those things are to be held by a firm faith which
are declared not only by express Scripture, but also
which we have received to be believed by the tradi-
tion of the Catholic Church, and which have been
defined in matters of faith and morals by the Chair
of Peter, and by General Councils legitimately con-
gregated.' *

The great Western schism, and the erroneous
opinions in the Council of Constance, had their legiti-
mate development in the Protestant Reformation:
and this, by separating part of Germany and Eng-
land from the Church, cleansed its unity of an infec-
tion which threatened not unity alone, but the foun-
dations of faith. We are often told, with much
pretension of wise and benevolent counsel, not to
draw too tight the conditions of communion, or to
define too precisely the doctrines of faith. No doubt
this advice was given at Constance, Florence, and
Trent. But the Catholic Church knows no policy
but truth; and its unity is extended, not by compre-
hension of error, but by the expulsion of all that is
at variance with the health and life of faith. We
shall see hereafter how this plea was put forward in
* Koskovany, De Rom. Pontif. torn. ii. 35.

101

1682, as it is at this moment, on the eve of the first
Council of the Vatican.

In 1579 the clergy of France, assembled at Melun,
decreed as follows : —

4 Bishops and their vicars, to whom this charge is
committed, shall take care that in all synods, diocesan
and provincial, all and every one, both clerics and
laymen, shall embrace, and with open profession pro-
nounce that faith which the Holy Roman Church, the
teacher, pillar, and ground of the truth, professes and
cherishes. For with this Church, by reason of its
[principality] primacy, it is necessary that all Churches
agree.' *

In 1625 a document was drawn up by the Assembly
under the title of c Address of the Assembly-General
of the Clergy of France to the Archbishops and
Bishops of the Kingdom/ It was never published,
for some reason not clearly known. It is given in the
' Proces-Verbaux,' printed by order of the Assembly
in 1762-5. In the 157th article it runs as follows r —
' The bishops are exhorted to honour the Holy Apos-
tolic See, and the Church of Rome, the Mother of
the Churches, founded in the infallible promise of
God, in the blood of the Apostles and Martyrs. . . .
They will respect also our Holy Father the Pope,
visible Head of the Church universal, Vicar of God on
earth, Bishop of Bishops and Patriarch of Patriarchs,
in a word, the Successor of S. Peter ; with whom the
Apostolate and the Episcopate have had their begin-
ning, and on whom Jesus Christ has founded the
* Roskovany, ibid, torn. ii. p. 105.

102

Church, in entrusting to him the keys of heaven,
together with infallibility of the faith, which we have
seen endure miraculously immovable in his successors
unto this day.7 *

We now come to a period in which the Church in
France, with the Court and Government, gave its
testimony to the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff,
.by a series of public acts which admit of no reply.
From the year 1651 to 1681 the Jansenistic contro-
versy was at its height.

In 1651, eighty-five bishops of France wrote to
Innocent X., praying that the five propositions of
Jansenius might be judged by the Apostolic See.
They say : ' It is the solemn custom of the Church
to refer the greater causes to the Holy See, which
custom the never-failing faith of Peter demands in
his right that we should perpetually observe. In
obedience, therefore, to this most just law, we have
determined to write to your Holiness on a subject of
the greatest gravity in matter of religion.' At the
end of the letter they add : ' Your Holiness has lately
known how much the authority of the Apostolic See
avails in the condemnation of the error in respect to
the double head of the Church ; " straightway the
tempest was calmed, and at the voice and command
of Christ the winds and the sea obeyed." ' f

After the condemnation of Jansenius by Innocent
X. on June 9, 1653, the bishops of France again
wrote, on July 15 : 'In which affair,' they said,
' this is worthy of observation, that as, on the relation

* Roskovany, ibid. torn. ii. p. 175.
•f Ibid. torn. ii. p. 180.

103

of the bishops of Africa, Innocent the First condemned
of old the Pelagian heresy, so, on the consultation of
the bishops of France, Innocent the Tenth proscribed
by his authority a heresy directly opposite to the
Pelagian. For the Catholic Church of that ancient
time, sustained only by the communion and authority
of the See of Peter, which shines forth in the decretal
letter of Innocent to the Africans, followed by another
letter from Zosimus to the bishops of all the world,
subscribed without delay the condemnation of the
Pelagian heresy. For it clearly saw, not only from
the promise of Christ our Lord made to Peter, but
also from the acts of the earlier Pontiffs, and from the
anathemas launched just before by Damasus against
Apollinaris and Macedonius, while as yet they were
not condemned by any synod, that judgments for
the confirmation of the rule of faith made by the
Pontiffs, when consulted by bishops, rest upon a
divine and supreme authority throughout the world;
to which all Christians are in duty bound to render
the obedience of the mind.' *

It is here to be observed that the condemnation
of Pelagianism by Innocent I. without any General
Council has always been received as infallible ; and
next, that the French bishops here declare the
' obedience of the mind,' that is, interior assent, and
not only obsequious silence, to be required of all
Christians.

On September 2, 1656, the bishops wrote to
Alexander VII. almost in the same words. They
call the letter of Zosimus i a peremptory decree/ and

* Ibid. p. 190.

104

quote S. Augustine's well-known words : ' Finita est
causa rescriptis Apostolicis,' &c. *

In the year 1660 the bishops wrote again, if pos-
sible, in stronger language. They declare : 4 In thee,
as in the Successor of Peter, is firmly seated the
strength of us all.' f

Lastly, in the encyclical letter of the assembly of
the clergy, on October 2, 1665, they declare: ' The
circular letter which the General Assembly of the
clergy of France wrote to all the bishops of the king-
dom on the 15th of July 1653 shows that the submis-
sion which we have been used to render to the Holy
Father is an inheritance of the bishops of France,
who, in a synod held under Charlemagne and Pepin,
made a solemn declaration of their will to preserve
their unity with the Koman Church, and to be subject
to S. Peter and his Successors to the end of their life.'J
They add, that all the Churches of France were in a
perfect will to follow all that the Pontiff should order
in matter of faith ;' and add : 4 This is the solid point
of our glory, which renders our faith invincible, and
our authority infallible, so long as we hold the one
and the other inseparably united to the centre of
religion, by binding ourselves to the See of S.
Peter/ &c.

We have here six solemn acts of the French
bishops and assemblies, recognising in the most ex-
plicit terms the stability of the faith of the See and

* D'Argentre, Collectio Judiciorum, torn. iii. p. 2, p. 280. Paris,
1736.

f Zaccaria, Anti-Febronius Vindicates, diss. v. cap. 2, p. 242.
Rome, 1843.

J D'Argentre, Coll. Jud., torn. iii. p. 2, p. 312.

105

of the Successor of Peter. It may be said with
truth, that the memory of Gerson and of the old
Sorbonne was by this time simply effaced from the
Church of France. The condemnation of Jansenius
rested, and rests to this day, upon the peremptory and
irreformable decree of Innocent X. The bishops of
France, on March 28, 1654, wrote to the Pontiff on
the subject of the Jansenist evasion as to the question of
fact respecting the propositions. They declared that the
Jansenists were endeavouring 4 to take away a part of
the ancient deposit of faith, the custody of which was
entrusted to the See of Peter by Christ, by dishonestly
drawing aside the majesty of the Apostolic Decree, to
the determination of fictitious controversies.'* It is
clear that the bishops here recognised the supreme
and plenary authority of the Pontiff in all its ampli-
tude of faith, morals, and dogmatic facts.

This was at that time the doctrine of France. In
a meeting of the leading Jansenists, held in the
Faubourg St. Jacques, on the publication of the Bull of
Innocent X., Pascal suggested that he had heard it
said that the Pope is not infallible. Arnauld imme-
diately answered, that if they should pursue that line
of defence ' they would give good reason to their oppo-
nents to treat them as heretics.' f

This part of the subject, then, may be summed up
in a quotation from Peter de Marca. The Jesuits, in
their College in Paris, had maintained in 1661 a thesis
affirming the infallibility of the Pope in faith, morals,
and dogmatic facts. The Jansenists endeavoured to

* Ibid. p. 825.

f Bouix, De Papa, &c., p. 564.

106

stir up the government to censure it. Peter de
Marca, just then translated from the Archbishopric of
Toulouse to Paris, declared that the opinion which
affirms the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, speaking
ex cathedra, is c the general and received opinion, ap-
proved by the Church of Rome and by the schools
of Christendom.' He adds : ' This opinion is the only
one which is taught and embraced in Italy, Spain, and
the other provinces of Christendom ; ' and that ' the
opinion which is called the opinion of the Doctors of
Paris is placed in the rank of those which are only
tolerated.' * This was before 1682 and the Pontifical
condemnation of the Four Articles. Again, he says :
4 Finally, it would be to open the door to a great
schism to endeavour to overturn these theses, so long
as they are understood in accordance with the com-
mon opinion ; because not only such an opposition tends
to ruin openly the constitutions published against
Jansenius, but even to dispute publicly and with au-
thority against the power of the Popes as infallible
Judges, when speaking ex cathedra, in matter of faith,
which is conceded to them by the consent of all the
Universities, except the ancient Sorbonne.' In the
same document he goes on to use the words quoted
in the Pastoral of 1867 : 4 The great majority of the
doctors [in France], not only in theology, but also
in law, follow the common opinion, which has founda-
tions very hard to destroy, as has been already said,
and they laugh at the opinion of the Old Sorbonne.' f

* Zaccaria, Anti-Febronius Vindicate, dissert, v. cap. 2, s. 5,
Notes.

f Ibid, note 5.

107

I hope that I have sufficiently justified the state-
ment made in 1867, that the Gallican opinions have
no warrant in the ancient traditions of the illustrious
Church of France.

III. FIRST FORMAL ENUNCIATION OF GALLIC ANISM.

We must now enter upon a less pleasing part of
our subject, the revival of the opinions of the c Old
Sorbonne,' and their fabrication into the Articles of
1682.

It would be out of place to recite the details of the
contest which arose from the thesis in the College of
the Jesuits. The Jansenists attacked the infallibility
of the Pope, because they were condemned by two
Pontifical constitutions. They had influence enough
with the Government to persuade the ministers of
Louis XIV. that the doctrine of the infallibility of the
Pope was dangerous to the Regale, and even to the
Crown of France. The Government and the Parlia-
ment prohibited the theses. The Sorbonne resisted
the dictation of Government in theology. The Par-
liament insisted on its obedience, and commanded the
Faculty to register its decrees respecting the infalli-
bility of the Pope. Out of this arose a conflict which
required seventeen decrees of Parliament to reduce the
Sorbonne to obedience. Finally, the expedient of the
Assembly of 1682 was decided on as a means of
giving a doctrinal and authoritative character to the
theology of the Court and Parliament. The history
of this policy of Colbert and his colleagues shall be

108

given from the work of M. Gerin, Judge of the Civil
Tribunal of the Seine, who has in this year published
a number of documents hitherto unknown, and con-
clusive in proof, in behalf of the Sorbonne and against
the Government.

The French writer already named has publicly
censured me for saying, in the Pastoral addressed to
you two years ago, that the Four Articles of 1682
are a ' Royal Theology ; ' and that in the assembly
by which they were passed, the Archbishop of Cam-
brai opposed them. I think it due to you, reverend
brethren, as well as to myself, both to repeat these
statements and to prove them.

This writer, signing himself the Abbe St. Pol,
thought to overturn my statement by quoting a pas-
sage from the Arret du Parlement, in which it is
said that the Articles were passed unanimously
(unanimement). Who ever doubted that the Par-
liament would say so, and did say so? But with
what truth it was said, we shall now see. The Abbe
St. Pol admits that the Archbishop of Cambrai
resisted until convinced. The Archbishop resisted
until he obtained an assurance that the Articles
should not be imposed by authority on the Theolo-
gical Schools of France ; which assurance was, never-
theless, immediately violated by an order of the
King.*

We have it, also, upon the evidence of the Pro-

* Gerin, Recherches historiques sur I'Assemblee du Clerge de
France de 1682, p. 201. Paris, Lecoffre, 1869. But I need say no
more on the fidelity of the Archbishop of Cambrai. His courageous
successor, in a noble address to his clergy on the 10th of September
last, has abundantly proved the truth of my statement in 1867.

109

cureur- General De Harlay, one of the chief managers
of this whole transaction, that c the majority ' of that
Assembly 'would with all their heart have changed
their mind the day after if they had been allowed to
do so.' * This evidence is beyond all refutation and
all suspicion. It occurs in a private letter to Colbert,
hitherto unpublished, and henceforward never to be
forgotten. But I shall have occasion to return upon
this document later.

In M. Gerin's volume incontestable proofs of that
date are to be found in the letters, memorials, and pri-
vate documents of Colbert, the Archbishop De Harlay,
and the Procureur-General, to establish beyond all con-
^troversy (1) that the Assembly of 1682 was neither
Synod nor Council of the Church of France, nor even a
representative assembly of the French clergy ; but an
assembly of Archbishops, Bishops, and others nomi-
nated by the King, or elected under every kind of
pressure and influence of the Court, in the midst of
strong and public protests by such men as the Car-
dinal Archbishop of Aix and the Vicar- General of
Toulouse. As a sample out of many, the following
will suffice. Colbert wrote to the Bishop of Avran-
ches : * Sir, the King has judged that you will be
able to serve him more usefully than any other ....
in the assembly formed of the clergy. His Majesty
commands me to write to you, to say that he has
made choice of you/ &c. Bossuet writes to De
Ranee* : ' The assembly is going to be held. It is
willed that I should be of it/ Fleury writes: ' The
King willed that the Bishop of Meaux should be of
* Ibid. p. 389,

110

it.' In the same terms Colbert wrote to the Arch-
bishop of Rouen. In the same way the elections
were forced at Toulouse, Narbonne, and Aix, indeed
in every place ; so that Daniel de Cosnac says : ' Cette
maniere de deputation ne me paraissait pas trop
glorieuse.' To give any idea of the complete
nullity of these pretended elections, it would be
necessary to transcribe the third chapter of M.
Gerin's work.

But (2) another fact of much greater importance
both to the unity of theological truth, and of the
illustrious Church in France, is this — that the Faculty
of Theology at the Sorbonne, together with the other
Theological Faculties in Paris, not only steadfastly
and courageously resisted the Four Articles, but it
may be truly said that they never received them. The
shadow of acceptance which was wrung from a cer-
tain number by acts of intimidation and violence on
the part of the King, the Court, and the Parliament,
is abundant proof that the Four Articles were
never accepted by the Theological Faculty of the
Sorbonne.* The importance of this is great and
manifold. It completes the rejection of the Four
Articles by every great Theological School. It clears
the great name of the Sorbonne of a shadow which
I had hitherto feared must rest upon it ; and lastly,
it clears the Church in France from participation in
an event which must always grieve those who revere
and love its noble Catholic traditions.

This was notorious : —

* La Sorbonne defend la foi,
Et le clerge 1'edit du roi.' — Chansons du

Ill

I will endeavour, as briefly as I can, to give the
substance of M. Gerin's evidence.

The Edict of March 20th ordered that the Four
Articles should be registered in all the Universities
and Faculties of Theology, and taught by their
professors.

The Faculties of Theology in Paris were composed
of 753 doctors. The houses were those of the
Sorbonne, Navarre, the Cholets, St. Sulpice, several
religious orders, and others.

Of these, Fleury tells us that the regulars, to a
man, maintained the infallibility of the Pontiff ; that
the congregations of secular priests were of the same
opinion.

We have before us a secret report, drawn up for
Colbert by some doctors, partisans of the Court, in
which they arrange in two classes, Pour Rome and
Contre Rome, the theologians of the Faculties in Paris.

Of the Sorbonne they say : c Except six or seven,
the whole house of the Sorbonne is educated in opinions
contrary to the declaration. The professors, except
the syndic, are so greatly opposed to it, that even
those who are paid by the King are not willing to
teach any one of the propositions which were pre-
sented to his Majesty in 1665; although, in the Col-
leges of the Sorbonne and Navarre, there are chairs
founded to teach controversy. The number living in
the College of the Sorbonne is very considerable.
They are all united in Ultramontane opinions except
four or jive. All the professors, even the royal, except
the syndic of the Faculty, are of the same maxims/ *

* Gerin, p. 843.

Of the House of Navarre, every professor, except
one, was Antigallican.

St. Sulpice, the Missions Etrangeres, and St. Nicho-
las du Chardonnet. — That ' those who have given an
opinion in this matter (of the Four Articles) are of
the opinion of the Sorbonne.' And of St. Sulpice it
was said that it was the seminary of the whole clergy
of the kingdom, and that there were many houses
which looked upon it as the parent house.* Of St.
Sulpice, in 1665 it was declared that the whole body
was extreme for the authority of the Pope.

The Carmelites, Augustinians, and Franciscans
were all Ultramontane.

Such were the men whom Louis XIV. commanded
to register and to teach the Four Articles.

The first President de Novion, the Procureur-
General de Harlay, and six councillors, were charged
to carry this declaration of the Edict to the Sor-
bonne on the 1st of May 1682. Three hundred
doctors were present. The dean by seniority, Be-
tille, was enfeebled with age. When the registration
of the Edict was demanded, the Faculty desired
time and deliberation. But Betille answered, l Gra-
tias agimus amplissimas,' and c Facultas pollicetur
obsequium ; ' on which the deputation withdrew, and
Betille with them. The three hundred remained,
expecting their return, and demanding a delibera-
tion; but the absence of the dean rendered it in-
formal. They then separated. Some days after,
the Procureur-General demanded the registration of
the Edict. The Faculty answered that they could
give no answer before the 1st of June.
* Ibid. p. 345.

113

The king, therefore, on the 10th of May, wrote to
the Syndic, saying, 'that he heard that "quelques
docteurs," certain doctors, were disposed to discuss the
Edict ; ' and added : c It is my will that if any one
betakes himself to do this, you stop him, by declaring
to him the order which you have received from me
in this present letter/*

Some advised a second deputation of the Parlia-
ment. But Colbert writes to the Procureur De
Harlay that he was afraid of two things: the one,
4 to let so much authority be seen;' the other, lof
letting it become known to the Court of Some that the
opinions of the Faculty on the subject of the Declaration
of the Clergy are not in conformity with the contents of
that Declaration.'^

The 1st of June passed without any new order for
the registration of the Edict. The opposition had
become much more vivid. Colbert wrote to De
Harlay, telling him that 4 the king had received a
letter, saying, that "all was lost;" that the king was
thinking of expelling MM. Masure, Desperier, and
Blanger, who appeared to have a chief part in the
affair; but that it would be at variance with his
principle, of avoiding as much as possible the appear-
ance of any opposition on the part of the Faculty, or
the using of authority on the part of his Majesty/ J
De Harlay, in answer, addressed to Colbert a
document, dated June 2, under the title of 'Projet
de reglement pour la tenue des Assemblies de
Sorbonne.' After giving his opinion that it was wiser

* Ibid. p. 351. t Ibid. p. 352. J Ibid. p. 354.

114

not to send the Parliament a second time to the
Faculty, and not to exhibit a great manifestation of
authority, he insists that public opinion must be
managed, and an appearance of liberty must be left
to the Sorbonne. He then goes on in the following :
4 It is not altogether without pretext to think it
strange that the Faculty should complain of the form
of the king's Edict, and of the new submission, and
of the Chancellor of the Church of Paris, and finally
of the obligation to teach a doctrine, when declared
by an assembly of the clergy, of whom the greater part
would change with all their heart to-morrow, if they
were allowed to do so. But, after all, no one was
wanting in respect to the Edict of the King/ &c. *

On the 16th of June, at six in the morning, an
usher brought an order of the Parliament, forbidding
the Faculty to assemble, or to deliberate, and com-
manding a certain number to appear in the Parlia-
ment, at the bar of the ushers, at seven o'clock. When
they arrived, the First President addressed them,
calling them a cabal, unworthy of confidence and of the
marks of esteem with which they had been honoured.

The Edict, the Declaration of the Clergy, was then
registered by command.

On that same day De Harlay wrote to the Chan-
cellor Le Tellier the following letter, which will for
ever destroy the illusion that the Four Articles were
the free and voluntary expression of the opinion of
the Church of France in the seventeenth century.
It runs as follows : —

* Ibid. p. 355.

115

16th June, 1682.

MY LORD,

After avoiding, as far as depended upon my care, to
employ with ostentation the authority which it pleased the
king to give us to bring the Faculty of Theology to obe-
dience, in the hope I had that the doctors, who are in very
great number, very learned and well intentioned, would
prevail over the contrary party ; nevertheless, the way in
which their deliberations yesterday began, and the assurance
we received that the evil party would prevail to-day by
about fifteen voices (as you have without doubt been in-
formed), having made me change my opinion, I therefore
thought no more of anything but executing the order of
the king, which M. de Seignelay brought us yesterday.
You will see, my Lord, by the Arret of which I send you a
copy, as well as by the address which M. the first President
made to the doctors who came to the Parliament, the manner
in which we proceeded ; with much regret on my part, and
with equal pain that I am obliged to have a hand in these
affairs, we applied remedies almost as disastrous as the evil,
and because we are still exposed to many disagreeable conse-
quences.*

He then details the reforms necessary to make the
Sorbonne 'serviceable to the king/ which consists
simply in expelling the Ultramontanes, of whom eight
were commanded to depart that same day, or the day
following; and further, in stopping the salaries of
those who could not produce a certificate of having
taught the Four Articles. We find a memorandum,
dated llth August 1685.f 'The professors of the
Sorbonne went to the Koyal treasury to demand
their payment, according to custom. Three were
paid. For the three others, they were told that, as
they had not satisfied the order of the king, which

* Gerin, p. 359. f Ibid- p. 375.

II 2

116

obliged them to teach the Propositions of the Clergy,
they would not be paid until they had given satis-
faction.' *

So resolute, unanimous, and constant was the Sor-
bonne in its opposition to the Four Articles, that the
Advocate-General Talon, on June 22, 1685, wrote to
the Secretary of State, that ' his Majesty knew better
than any one how important it is to stop the progress
which the cabals and evil doctrines of the College of
the Sorbonne were making in the Faculty of Theology/
He adds that there was only one Professor, c qui en-
seigne nos maximes.'f 'The evil doctrine of the
College of the Sorbonne ' is that which M. 1'Abbe St.
Pol, Chanoine Honoraire, calls at this day 4'ultra-
Catholicisme en Angleterre.'

I will now add only two more quotations.

In 1760 the Abbe Chauvelin, Counsellor of the
Parliament of Paris, deadly enemy of the Jesuits
and of the bishops who defended them, reporter of
the Proces against the Society of Jesus, published,

* Ibid. p. 376.

f How deeply the national spirit had pervaded the minds and
language of men at that time, appears from the constant use of such
phrases as, ' la doctrine fra^aise,' ' les opinions francaises,' ' nos
maximes.' We find also Massillon writing, * comme eveque fran9ais/
The words grate strangely on the ears of those to whom the Church
of God is more than nation, country, and kindred. I cannot refrain
from quoting the noble and delicate words of the Archbishop of
Cambrai to his clergy in synod on September 10th last : — ' There
is no nation that may claim the privilege of having, in the bosom of
the Catholic Church, its theology apart, and its peculiar doctrines,
which a kind of prescription gives it the right to preserve for ever.
Understood in this way, these national doctrines would be evidently
incompatible with Catholic unity ; and they would bring on in time,
and by the force of events, the divisions which consummate under
our eyes the final ruin of Protestantism.'

117

without name, the famous work, c La Tradition des
Faits.' In it we read a summary of all I have en-
deavoured to detail.

' When the attempt was made to oblige all eccle-
siastics to profess the (maximes de France) opinions
of France, what difficulties were there not to be
encountered! It was necessary to wrest an assent
from many of them ; others opposed obstacles which
all the authority of Parliament had great difficulty
in overcoming. There was need of all the zeal, and
all the lights of certain prelates, and certain doctors
attached to the true opinions, to reclaim the great
number of Ultramontanes who were found among
the clergy of France. There may be counted seven-
teen orders which Parliament was obliged to make,
to force the Faculty of Theology to register the
regulations of 1665, and the doctors to conform to
them. The learned prelates who drew up the cele-
brated Declaration of 1682 met with no less contra-
diction in getting it adopted. The ecclesiastics
never ceased to rise against it, until the Parliament
employed its authority to constrain them. When
the Parliament endeavoured to enforce the registration
of the Edict of 1682 by the Faculties, the pretexts
and the subterfuges to avoid it multiplied without
end. The University and the Faculty of Law sub-
mitted without any difficulty. But it was necessary
to come to the exercise of authority, to bring the
Faculty of Theology to obedience.' *

We seem rather to be reading the history of the
Anglican Reformation than of the glorious Church

of France.

* Gerin, p. 389.

118

One more quotation shall be the last. In the Session
of the Assembly on the 24th November, 1682, the
Promoter Cheron, after saying that Louis XIV. sur-
passed David in gentleness, Solomon in wisdom,
Coristantine in religion, Alexander in courage, all
the Caesars and all kings on earth in power, applied
to him this Byzantine text; which I do not translate,
but leave as I find it. ' In exercitu plus quam rex,
in acie plus quam miles, in regno plus quam impe-
rator, in disciplina civili plus quam praetor, in con-
sistorio plus quam judex, in Ecclesia plus quam
sacerdos.' *

You will remember that in the former Pastoral I
only said that Gallicanism was a Royal Theology,
and no part of the Catholic tradition of the glorious
Church of France. I here give the first proof of my
assertion ; and shall be ready, if need be, to add
more hereafter.

In the Pastoral on the Centenary I recited the
prompt and repeated censures of the acts of
the Assembly by Innocent XL, April 11, 1682;
Alexander VIII. in 1688 and in 1691; the retrac-
tation, by the French Bishops and by the King, of
the Acts of 1682; and finally, the condemnation of
the insertion of the Four Articles in the Synod of
Pistoia by Pius VI., in the Bull ' Auctorem Fidei.'
To this, much might be added-; but as one Pontifical
condemnation is enough for those with whom we are
now dealing, I forbear to add more.

Such, then, is the present state and aspect of this
question. We have traced it, first, through its first
* Ibid. p. 301.

119

period of constant, immemorial, universal, and public
practice, down to the Council of Constance ; secondly,
through the period of conflict, and therefore of ana-
lysis, from the Council of Constance to the Assembly
of 1682 ; thirdly, from 1682, in the Pontifical Acts by
which the opinion adverse to the infallibility of the
Successor of Peter, speaking ex cathedra, has been,
if not condemned, at least so discouraged that the
opposite opinion may be affirmed to be at least cer-
tain, if not de fide, though not imposed as of universal
obligation. In this stage of the question an (Ecu-
menical Council meets. The question, therefore, is
not whether the doctrine be true, which cannot be
doubted ; or definable, which is not open to doubt :
but whether such a definition be opportune, that is,
timely and prudent.

Those who maintain that the time is ripe, and that
such a definition would be opportune, justify their
opinion on the following reasons : —

1. Because the doctrine of the infallibility of the
Vicar of Jesus Christ, speaking ex cathedra, in mat-
ter of faith and morals, is true.

2. Because this truth has been denied.

3. Because this denial has generated extensive
doubt as to the truth of this doctrine, which lies at
the root of the immemorial and universal practice of
the Church, and therefore at the foundation of
Christianity in the world.

4. Because this denial, if it arose informally about
the time of the Council of Constance, has been
revived, and has grown into a formal and public
error since the closing of the last General Council.

rzo

5. Because, if the next General Council shall pass
it over, the error will henceforward appear to be
tolerated, or at least left in impunity ; and the Ponti-
fical censures of Innocent XL, Alexander VIII.,
Innocent XII., Pius VI., will appear to be of doubtful
effect.

6. Because this denial of the traditional belief of
the Church is not a private, literary, and scholastic
opinion, but a patent, active, and organised opposition
to the prerogatives of the Holy See.

7. Because this erroneous opinion has gravely en-
feebled the doctrinal authority of the Church in the
mind of a certain number of the faithful; and if
passed over in impunity, this ill effect will be still
further encouraged.

8. Because this erroneous opinion has at times
caused and kept open a theological and practical divi-
sion among pastors and people, and has given occasion
to domestic criticisms, mistrusts, animosities, and
alienations.

9. Because these divisions tend to paralyse the
action of truth upon the minds of the faithful ad
intra ; and consequently, by giving a false appearance
of division and doubt among Catholics, upon the
minds of Protestants and others ad extra.

10. Because, as the absence of a definition gives
occasion for these separations and oppositions of
opinion among pastors and people, so, if defined, the
doctrine would become a basis and a bond of unity
among the faithful.

11. Because, if defined in an (Ecumenical Council,
the doctrine would be at once received throughout

121

the world, both by those who believe the infallibility
of the Pontiff and by those who believe the infalli-
bility of the Church; and with the same universal joy
and unanimity as the definition of the Immaculate
Conception.

12. Because the definition of the ordinary means
whereby the faith is proposed to the world is re-
quired to complete the Treatise c de Fide Divina.1

13. Because the same definition is required to
complete the Treatise cde Ecclesia deque dotibus
ejus.'

14. Because it is needed to place the Pontifical
Acts during the last three hundred years, both in de-
claring the truth, as in the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception, and in condemning errors, as in the
long series of propositions condemned in Baius, Jan-
senius, and others, beyond cavil or question ; and, still
more, to make manifest that the active infallibility
of the Church, between Council and Council, is not
dormant, suspended, or intermittent ; and to exclude
the heretical supposition that infallible decrees are
left to the exposition and interpretation of a fallible
judge.

15. Because the full and final declaration of the
divine authority of the Head of the Church is needed
to exclude from the minds of pastors and faithful the
political influences which have generated Gallicanism,
Imperialism, Eegalism, and Nationalism, the peren-
nial sources of error, contention, and schism.

For these and for many more reasons, which it is
impossible now to detail, many believe that a defini-
tion or declaration which would terminate this long

122

and pernicious question would be opportune, and that
it might for ever be set at rest by the condemnation
of the propositions following : —

1. That the decrees of the Roman Pontiffs in
matter of faith and morals do not oblige the con-
science unless they be made in a General Council,
or before they obtain, at least, the tacit consent of
the Church.

2. That the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks in
matter of faith and morals, as the Universal Doctor
and Teacher of the Church, may err.

They have also a desire, which springs from their
fraternal and grateful affection for the illustrious
Church of France, the Mother of S. Germanus, from
whom England derived the Episcopate, and the Guar-
dian of the Holy See, glorious for a long history of
splendid deeds of faith: it is, that the Bishops of
France should, in this first Council of the Vatican,
stand forth to lead the voices of the Episcopate in
asking that the infallibility of the Vicar of Jesus
Christ may be declared by a decree of the universal
Church.

There was a day in which the great family of
S. Dominic rejoiced the whole Catholic world, when,
at the feet of Gregory XVI., it laid its petition that
the words ' conceived without original sin ' should be
inserted in the Litanies. The suffrage of that illus-
trious Order closed up the circle of unity among the
faithful.

The suffrage of the illustrious Church of France
for the closing of a divergence, now become historical,
among the pastors and faithful of that great Catholic

123

people, would give joy to the whole world. They
may claim the glory of this act as a prerogative, for
a reason like that which has moved brave legions to
claim the peril and the glory of leading the last and
crowning act of some great warfare at its glorious
close.

124

CHAPTER IV.

TWO EFFECTS OF THE COUNCIL CERTAIN.

WHETHER the first Council of the Vatican will define
that the Vicar of Jesus Christ, speaking ex cathedra,
in matter of faith and morals, is infallible or no, is, and,
till the event, must remain a secret with God ; but
whatsoever the decision of the Council may be, we
shall assuredly know that its decision is infallibly
right, and we shall embrace it not only with obedi-
ence, but with the interior assent of mind and will.

There are, however, two things which the Council
will certainly accomplish. First, it will bring out
more visibly than ever the only alternative proposed
to the human intellect, — namely, rationalism or faith ;
and next, it will show to the civil powers of the
Christian world the inevitable future they are now
preparing for themselves.

As to the former, it will be more than ever
manifest that the basis upon which God has willed
that His revelation should rest in the world is, in
the natural order, the testimony of the Catholic
Church, which, if considered only as a human and
historical witness, affords the highest and most certain
evidence for the fact and for the contents of the
Christian revelation. They who deny the sufficiency
of this human and historical evidence ruin the basis

125

of Christianity; they who, under the pretensions of
historical criticism, deny the witness of the Catholic
Church to be the maximum of evidence, even in a
historical sense, likewise ruin the foundation of moral
certainty in respect to Christianity altogether. If
the historical evidence of the Catholic Church
for the stability of the faith in the See and the
Successor of Peter be not sufficient to prove, as a
fact of history, that the Christian Church has so held
and taught, history is altogether a poor and slender
foundation for the events and actions of the past.
The pretentious historical criticism of these days has
prevailed, and will prevail, to undermine the peace and
the confidence, and even the faith of some. But the
4 City seated on a hill ' is still there, high and out of
reach. It cannot be hid, arid is its own evidence,
anterior to its history and independent of it. Its
history is to be learned of itself.

The Catholic Church is not only a human and
historical witness of its own origin, constitution, and
authority; it is also a supernatural and divine wit-
ness, which can neither fail nor err. In the natural
order of human evidence, it is a sufficient motive to
convince a prudent man that Christianity is a divine
revelation. This motive of credibility is sufficient for
the act of faith in the Church as a divine witness. In
the supernatural order, the Church is thereby known
to be divine in its foundation, constitution, and endow-
ments. The same evidence which proves Christ-
ianity to be a divine revelation proves the Catholic
Church to be a part of the faith of Christianity, and
to be likewise the incorporation and channel of truth

126

and grace to the world. The same evidence which
proves the Catholic Church to be divinely founded,
proves it also to be infallible; and the same evidence
which proves the Church to be infallible proves the
infallibility of the See and Successor of Peter. I have
already said that the evidence for the infallibility
of the See and Successor of Peter exceeds in explicit-
ness and extent the evidence for the infallibility
of the Church, without reference to its Head and
centre. But this cumulus of evidence proves that
the Church and its Head are the visible and audible
witness, sustained and guided by a divine assistance
in declaring the revelation of Jesus Christ to the
world. It is not, therefore, by criticism on past
history, but by acts of faith in the living voice of the
Church at this hour, that we can know the faith.
It is not by the fallible criticism of the human mind
on the dubious, or, if so be, even the authentic
writings of uninspired men, but by faith in the
divine order of the Christian world, that God wills us
to learn the doctrines of revelation. Unless historical
criticism lead us into the presence of a Divine Witness,
and deliver us over to His teaching, our highest cer-
tainties are but human. No historical certainty can
be called Science, except only by courtesy. Even
Theology, which may be resolved into principles of
absolute certainty by way of faith, is not properly a
science.* It is time that the pretensions of ' historical
science/ and c scientific historians/ be reduced to their
proper sphere and limits. And this the Council will

* Greg. De Valent, torn. i. disp. i, q. 1, p. 3, pag. 22. Ingold.
1592.

127

do, not by contention or anathema, but by the words,
4 it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.7

The other certain result of the Council will be, to
make more than ever manifest to the civil powers of
the Christian world the inevitable future they are
now preparing for themselves.

A member of the Corps Legislatif in France, two
years ago, announced that, in the Bull of Indiction of
the Council, the Holy Father, by omitting to invite
the civil governments to take part in it, had pro-
claimed the separation of Church and State.

A moment's thought will be enough to explain why
no civil government was invited to attend. What
government, at this day, professes to be Catholic ?
How should any government which does not even
claim to be Catholic be invited? What country in
Europe, at this day, recognises the unity and authority
of the Catholic Church as a part of its public laws?
What country has not, by royal edicts, or legislative
enactments, or revolutionary changes, abolished the
legal status of the Catholic Church within its terri-
tory? On what plea, then, could they be invited? As
governments or nations, they have, by their own act,
withdrawn themselves from the unity of the Church.
As moral or legal persons, they are Catholic no longer.
The faithful, indeed, among their subjects will be
represented in the Council by their pastors ; and their
pastors are not only invited, but obliged to be pre-
sent. If any separation has taken place, it is because
the civil powers have separated themselves from the
Church. They have created the fact, the Holy See
has only recognised it. The gravity of the fact is not

128

to be denied. It is strange that, with the immuta-
bility of the Church, and the ' progress/ as it is
vaunted, of society before their eyes, men should
charge upon the Church the responsibility of breaking
its relations with society. The Church at one and
the same time is accused of immobility and of change.
It is not the Church which has departed from unity,
science, liberty; but society which has departed from
Christianity and from faith. It is said : 4 If Christian
unity be destroyed, if science have separated from
faith, if liberty choose to reign without religion, a
terrible share of the responsibility for these evils rests
upon the men who have represented in the Christian
world unity, faith, and religion.' Does this mean, upon
the Episcopate, Councils, and Pontiffs? Who, if not
these, i have represented in the Christian world unity,
faith, and religion ' ? Have they, then, misrepresented
these things to the world? If so, who shall represent
them? and where, then, is the Divine office of the
Church ? The Pontiffs have been for generations lift-
ing up their voice in vain to warn the governments of
Christendom of the peril of breaking the bonds which
unite civil society to the faith and to the Church.
They have maintained inflexibly, and at great suffer-
ing and danger, their own temporal dominion, not
only for the spiritual independence of the Church,
but for the consecration of civil society. But the
governments of the Christian world would not listen;
and now a General Council meets, and the place where,
as at the Lateran, at Florence, and at Trent, they would
have sat, is empty. The tendency of civil society
everywhere is to depart further and further from the

129

Church. Progress in these days means to advance
along the line of departure from the old Christian order
of the world. The civil society of Christendom is the
offspring of the Christian family, and the foundation
of the Christian family is the sacrament of matrimony.
From this spring domestic and public morals. Most
governments of Europe have ceased to recognise in
marriage anything beyond the civil contract, and, by
legalising divorce, have broken up the perpetuity of
even that natural contract. With this will surely perish
the morality of society and of homes. A settlement in
the foundations may be slow in sinking, but it brings
all down at last. The civil and political society of
Europe is steadily returning to the mere natural order.
The next step in de- Christianising the political life of
nations is to establish national education without
Christianity. This is systematically aimed at where-
soever the Revolution has its way. This may, before
long, be attempted among ourselves. It is already in
operation elsewhere. The Church must then form
its own schools; and the civil power will first refuse
its aid, and soon its permission, that parents should
educate their offspring except in State universities
and State schools. The period and policy of Julian
is returning. All this bodes ill for the Church; but
worse for the State. The depression of the moral
order of right and truth is the elevation of the mate-
rial order of coercion and of force. The civil powers
of the world do not choose this course; they only
advance in it. There is behind them a power invis-
ible, which urges them onward in their estrangements
from the Church ; and that unseen power is at work

130

everywhere. It is one, universal, invisible, but not
holy ; the true natural and implacable enemy of the
One, Visible, Universal Church. The anti-Christian
societies are one in aim and operation, even if they be
not one in conscious alliance. And the governments
of the world, some consciously, others unconsciously,
disbelieving the existence of such societies, and there-
fore all the more surely under their influence, are
being impelled towards a precipice over which
monarchies and law and the civil order of the
Christian society of men will go together. It is the
policy of the secret societies to engage governments
in quarrels with Kome. The breach is made, and the
Revolution enters. The Catholic society of Europe
has been weakened, and wounded, it may be, unto
death. The Catholic Church now stands alone, as in
the beginning, in its divine isolation and power.
4Et nunc, reges, intelligite; erudimini, qui judicatis
terram,' There is an abyss before you, into which
thrones and laws and rights and liberties may sink
together. You have to choose between the Revolution
and the Church of God. As you choose, so will your
lot be. The General Council gives to the world one
more witness for the truths, laws, and sanctities
which include all that is pure, noble, just, venerable
upon earth. It will be an evil day for any State in
Europe if it engage in conflict with the Church of
God. No weapon formed against it ever yet has
prospered. The governments of Europe have
been for the last year agitated and uncertain; the
attitude of France is wise and deliberate, worthy
of a great people with the traditions of Catholic

131

history at its back. The attitude of other great
powers is also hitherto dignified and serious, pro-
portionate to great responsibilities. Lesser poten-
tates and their counsellors may circulate notes and
resolve questions, and furnish matter for newspapers ;
but they are not the men to move mountains.

Whilst I was writing these lines a document has
appeared purporting to be the answers of the Theo-
logical Faculty of Munich to the questions of the
Bavarian Government.*

The questions and the answers are so evidently
concerted, if not written by the same hand, and the
animus of the document so evidently hostile to the
Holy See, and so visibly intended to create embar-
rassments for the supreme authority of the Church,
both in respect to its past acts and also in respect to
the future action of the (Ecumenical Council, that I
cannot pass it over. But in speaking of it I am
compelled, for the first time, to break silence on a
danger which has for some years been growing in its
proportions, and, I fear I must add, in its attitude of
menace. The answers of the University of Munich
are visibly intended to excite fear and alarm in the
civil powers of Europe, and thereby to obstruct the
action of the (Ecumenical Council if it should judge
it to be opportune to define the Infallibility of the
Pope. The answers are also intended to create an
impression that the theological proofs of the doctrine
are inadequate, and its definition beset with uncer-
tainty and obscurity. In a word, the whole corre-
spondence is a transparent effort to obstruct the free-
* Times, Sept. 20, 1869.
i 2

132

dom of the (Ecumenical Council on the subject of the
infallibility of the Pontiff; or, if that doctrine be
denned, to instigate the civil governments to assume
a hostile attitude towards the Holy See. And this
comes in the name of liberty, and from those who
tell us that the Council will not be free !

I shall take the liberty, without further words,
of dismissing the Bavarian Government from our
thoughts. But I must declare, with much regret,
that this Munich document appears to me to be
seditious/

Facts like these give a certain warrant to the asser-
tions and prophecies of politicians and Protestants.
They prove that in the Catholic Church there is a
school at variance with the doctrinal teaching of the
Holy See in matters which are not of faith. But
they do not reveal how small that school is. Its
centre would seem to be at Munich; it has, both in
France and in England, a small number of adherents.
They are active, they correspond, and, for the most
part, write anonymously. It would be difficult to
describe its tenets, for none of its followers seern
to be agreed in all points. Some hold the infal-
libility of the Pope, and some defend the Tem-
poral Power. Nothing appears to be common to all,
except an animus of opposition to the acts of the
Holy See in matters outside the faith.

In this country, about a year ago, an attempt was
made to render impossible, as it was confidently but
vainly thought, the definition of the infallibility of the
Pontiff by reviving the monotonous controversy about
Pope Honorius. Later we were told of I know not

133

what combination of exalted personages in France for
the same end. It is certain that these symptoms are
not sporadic and disconnected, but in mutual under-
standing and with a common purpose. The anti-
Catholic press has eagerly encouraged this school of
thought. If a Catholic can be found out of tune
with authority by half a note, he is at once extolled
for unequalled learning and irrefragable logic. The
anti-Catholic journals are at his service, and he vents
his opposition to the common opinions of the Church
by writing against them anonymously. Sad as this
is, it is not formidable. It has effect almost alone
upon those who are not Catholic. Upon Catholics
its effect is hardly appreciable; on the Theological
Schools of the Church it will have little influence ;
upon the (Ecumenical Council it can have none.

I can hardly persuade myself to believe that the
University of Munich does not know that the rela-
tions between the Pope, even supposed to be infal-
lible, and the civil powers have been long since pre-
cisely defined in the same acts which defined the
relations between the Church, known to be infallible,
and the civil authority. Twelve Synods or Councils^
two of them (Ecumenical, have long ago laid down
these relations of the spiritual and civil powers.* If
the Pope were declared to be infallible to-morrow, it
would in no way affect those relations.

We may be sure, reverend and dear brethren, that
this intellectual disaffection, of which, in these last days,
we have had in France a new and mournful example,
will have no influence upon either the (Ecumenical

* Bellarm. Opnscula. Adv. Barclaium, p. 845, ed. Col. 1617.

134

Council, or the policy of the Great Powers of Europe.
They will not meddle with speculations of theological
or historical critics. They know too well that they
cannot do in the nineteenth century what was done
in the sixteenth and the seventeenth.

The attempt to put a pressure upon the General
Council, if it have any effect upon those who are
subject to certain Governments, would have no effect
but to rouse a just indignation in the Episcopate of
the Church throughout the world. They hold their
jurisdiction from a higher fountain ; and they recog-
nise no superior in their office of Judges of Doctrine
save only the Vicar of Jesus Christ. This preliminary
meddling has already awakened a sense of profound
responsibility and an inflexible resolution to allow
no pressure, or influence, or menace, or intrigue to
cast so much as a shadow across their fidelity to the
Divine Head of the Church and to His Vicar upon
earth.

Moreover, we live in days when the 4 Eegium Placi-
tum' and 'Exequaturs' and 'Arrets' of Parliament in
spiritual things are simply dead. It may have been
possible to hinder the promulgation of the Council
of Trent : it is impossible to hinder the promul-
gation of the Council of the Vatican. The very
liberty of which men are proud will publish it.
Ten thousand presses in all lands will promulgate
every act of the Church and of the Pontiff, in
the face of all civil powers. Once published, these
acts enter the domain of faith and conscience, and
no human legislation, no civil authority, can efface
them. The two hundred millions of Catholics will

135

know the decrees of the Vatican Council; and to
know them is to obey. The Council will ask no
civil enforcement, and it will need no civil aid. The
Great Powers of Europe have long declared that
the conscience of men is free from civil constraint.
They will not stultify their own declarations by
attempting to restrain the acts of the Vatican Coun-
cil. The guardians and defenders of the principles
of 1789 ought to rise as one man against all who
should so violate the base of the political society
in France. What attitude lesser Governments may
take is of lesser moment.

May He in whose hands are the destinies of king-
doms and of nations guide the rulers of Christendom
by a spirit of wisdom and justice at this crisis of their
trial. This Council will assuredly be ; in ruinam et
in resurrectionem multorum.' If Christian nations
be desolated, then will come the alternatives of anti-
Christian socialism, or the Catholic order of the
world, purified in the fire and reunited to the centre
of stability and justice, from which it is now departing.
Those who desire such a future are busy in scattering
fears, mistrusts, and falsehoods as to the acts of the
Council, and even of the intentions of the Sovereign
Pontiff. These ignoble tactics have been rebuked with
a calm and dignified severity by the bishops of Ger-
many, whose words I had rather use than my own :
' Never will the (Ecumenical Council declare a new
doctrine which is not contained in the Scriptures, or
the Apostolic traditions. When the Church makes a
decree in matter of faith, -it does not proclaim a new
dogma ; it only sets in a clearer light an ancient and

136

primordial truth, and defends it against new errors/
' In a word, the (Ecumenical Council will declare no
new principle, nor any other than that which is already
graven on your hearts by your faith and conscience ;
or than those which have been held sacred for ages
by Christian peoples, on which repose, and have
ever reposed, the welfare of States, the authority of
magistrates, the liberty of nations, and which 'are at
the same time the foundations of true science and
true civilisation.' *

There is one thing against which it is our duty to
be on our guard ; I mean a fearful and timid anxiety
as to the results of the Council and as to the future of
the Church. It is the illusion of some minds to imagine
that the Church was strong once, but is weak now ;
that the days of its supremacy are over, and that now
it is in decline. The reverse is the fact. There was
.never a time since the Apostles descended from the
guest-chamber to traverse the world, when the
universality of the Church was so manifest, and its
divine jurisdiction so widespread. There was never a
moment when the unity of the Church both within
and without, that is the unity of the faithful with
their pastors, and of the pastors with their Head,
the unanimity of pastors and flocks in faith and
in charity, was so solid and invincible. From the
mystery of the Holy Trinity to the dogma of the Im-
maculate Conception, there is not a doctrine of faith
on which Catholics in all the world differ by a shade.
Peter's faith has not failed, and the Church rests
on Peter's faith. We may be upon the eve of

* Address of the Bishops at Fulda, Sept. 6, 1869.

137

a great conflict, but the conflict is the forerunner
of a greater manifestation of the Kingdom of God
on earth. The eyes of men are looking one
way, as they that look for the morning. They are
hungering after rest, certainty, and truth. They
have sought it up and down, and have not found it.
The broken cisterns will hold 110 water; and the dim
tradition of a fountain far off and yet at hand, closed
to the world but ever open to all who will, is
rising again upon their memory. The nations of the
Christian world have been deceived, and turned
against the Mother that bare them. But the unrest,
and the unsatisfied craving of the heart and of the
reason, is drawing them once more toward the only
Church. All countries, above all our own, are con-
scious, in their political, religious, and intellectual life,
of desires they cannot satisfy, and needs they can-
not meet. 4 As he that is hungry dreameth and
eateth, but when he is awake his soul is empty : and
as he that is thirsty dreameth and drinketh, and after
he is awake is yet faint with thirst and his soul is
empty ; so shall be the multitude of all the nations
that have fought against Mount Sion.' * It is the
conflict with the Church of God that has wasted and
withered the spiritual and intellectual life of Europe.
England, with all its faults, is very dear to us. It has
still a zeal for God; and the face of our land is yet
beautiful with the memories of our Saints and Mar-
tyrs. The Council has moved it with strange and
kindly aspirations. England hopes for some clearing
in the dark sky which for the last three hundred years

* Isaias xxix. 8.

138

has lowered upon it ; for some light upon the horizon ;
some change which will open to it once more the
unity of Christendom and the rest of immutable
faith. You will labour and pray that this visita-
tion of the Spirit of God, now sensibly breathing
over England, and over all the Christian world, may
open the hearts of men, and prepare them for His
voice, which, through this Council, is calling them
home to the Mother of us all, the only fountain of
grace and truth.

I remain, reverend and dear Brethren,

Your affectionate Servant in Christ,
* HENRY EDWARD,

Archbishop of Westminster.
KOSAEY SUNDAY, 1869.

139

POSTSCRIPT.

WHEN the foregoing Pastoral was already printed,
I received from Paris Mgr. Maret's volumes, 'Du
Concile General et de la Paix Religieuse.' I am
sorry that I did not see them in time to weigh certain
points raised in them before publishing what I have
here written.

The Bishop has, however, re-stated so clearly the
opinion he maintains, in the preface to his work,
that I am at no loss to compare it precisely with
the doctrine maintained in this Pastoral.

In making that comparison, I trust I shall use
no word at variance with the fraternal charity and
respect due from me to Mgr. Maret, both in person
and as a brother.

He says of his own opinion, which shall be stated
in his own words,* c As truth cannot be contrary to
itself, this doctrine is easily reconcilable with the
doctrines which are the most moderate of the School
which bears the name of Ultramontane. What
Divine right, what certain right of the Sovereign
Pontificate is there, which is not enunciated and
defended in our book ? The Pontifical infallibility
itself is not therein denied, but brought back to its
true nature. We acknowledge and prove that the
Pope, by his right to consult or to convoke the
* Du Concile General et de la Paix Eeligieuse. Preface, xxvi. vii.

140

episcopal body, by the possibility in which he is of
acting always in concert with it, possesses in virtue
of the Divine order the assured means to give infal-
libility to his dogmatic judgments.'
From this I gather : —

1. That the Pontiff possesses a means of giving
infallibility to his judgments.

2. That this means is the right of consulting the
episcopal body.

From this it would seem to follow —

1. That, apart from the episcopal body, the Pontiff
is not infallible.

2. That consultation with the episcopal body is
a necessary condition of giving infallibility to his
judgments.

3. That the Pontiff gives infallibility to his judg-
ments by receiving it from the episcopal body, or
by his union with it.

If I understand this statement, it denies the infal-
libility of the Pontiff altogether ; for it affirms it only
when the Pontiff has given to his judgment what he
has received from the episcopal body, or what he
cannot have without it.

In this process the words of our Lord seem to be
inverted. It is his brethren who confirm him, not
he who confirms his brethren.

The endowment of infallibility residing in the
body flows to the Head when in consultation with
the Episcopate. It is influxus corporis in Caput, not
Capitis in corpus.

The doctrine I have maintained in these pages is
as follows : —

141

1. That the endowment of stability or infallibility
in Faith was given to Peter, and from him, according
to our Lord's words, confirma fratres tuos, was de-
rived to his brethren.

2. That this endowment, which is again and again
called by the Fathers and Councils the i Privilegium
Petri,' or the 4 Praerogativa Sedis Petri,' was given
in him to his Successors.

3. That the Successor of Peter still c confirms his
brethren ' by the possession and exercise of a divine
right and endowment, not only of consulting them
or of convoking them, but of witnessing, teaching,
and judging by a special divine assistance which
preserves him, as Universal Teacher in faith and
morals, from error.

The office of Peter was not to be confirmed by, but
to confirm, his brethren ; the same is the office of his
Successor, even when apart from convocation or
consultation with the Episcopate as a body, whether
congregated or dispersed.

In the testimonies I have quoted it is evident
that, in virtue of a divine assistance, the dogmatic
judgments of the Pontiff ex cathedra do not receive
from the episcopal body, but give to the Universal
Church, an infallible declaration of truth.

I must ask you to review the evidence I have
given, in all of which the promise of our Lord, c I
have prayed for thee,' &c., is either expressed or
understood ; and Peter's privilege of stability in faith
is ascribed to his Successor as the inheritance of his
See.

Mgr. Maret proceeds to ask, c Do we contend against

142

the authority of judgments ex cathedra when we
affirm, with the great masters in theology, that there
are certainly judgments of that kind only when the
Pope employs the most certain means which God
gives him to avoid error ; that is to say, the concur-
rence of the bishops ? '

If I understand these words, they mean : —

1. That no judgments are certainly ex cdthedrd
except when the Pontiff acts with the concurrence
of the bishops.

2. That the Pontiff is bound to employ the means
which is the most certain to avoid error ; namely, the
concurrence of the bishops.

The doctrine maintained by me, under the guidance
of every great master of theology of all Schools,
Dominican, Franciscan, Jesuit, so far as I know,
excepting only theologians of the Gallican school,*
is, that judgments ex cathedra are, in their essence,
judgments of the Pontiff, apart from the episcopal
body, whether congregated or dispersed. This con-
currence of the episcopal body may or may not be
united to the act of the Pontiff, which is perfect
and complete in itself. It is to the Cathedra Petri,
apart from the Episcopate, that the faithful and
pastors of all the world throughout Christian history
have had recourse. For instance, the condemnation
of Pelagianism by Innocent the First, and of Jansenius

* Of this I think sufficient proof was given in the Pastoral of
1867. But I may refer to Aguirre, Defensio Cathedra? Petri ; Gon-
zalez, De Infallib. Rom. Pontificis 5 Sehrader, De Unitate Eomana;
Theoph. Raynaud, Avrog ecpa • who expressly prove this point by
ample quotations. The words of Peter de Marca, p. 10G supra, are
alone enough.

143

by Innocent the Tenth, were appeals to the Cathedra
Petri, and judgments ex cathedra, to which the con-
sultation of the African or of the French bishops
respectively contributed no influx of infallibility.
And those two judgments were regarded as infallible,
from the moment of their promulgation, by the whole
Church.

If there be no certain judgments ex cathedra apart
from the episcopal body, what are the judgments
of Alexander VIIL, Innocent XL, and Pius VI.?

What are the condemnations in the c Theses Dam-
nataa ? ' The episcopal body was not united with the
Pontiff in their publication. When did it become so?
Till this concurrence was verified, these Pontifical
Acts, according to Mgr. Maret's opinion, were not ex
cathedra, and therefore were not certainly infallible.
How long were they in this tentative state of sus-
pended or conditional infallibility? Who has ever
discerned and declared the epoch and the crisis after
which they became judgments ex cathedral Silence
is not enough. Even strong terms of adhesion are
not enough. The bishops of France received the
condemnation of Jansenius by Innocent X. as infal-
lible in 1653, but in 1682 published the Four Articles.

All this, if I rightly understand it, seems to present
an inverted theory, at variance with the tradition,
praxis, faith, and theology of the Church.

But further, if the Pontiffs are bound to employ
4 the most certain means ' to avoid error — namely,
the concurrence of the episcopal body — they must
either convoke a General Council or interrogate
numerically the Episcopate throughout the world. Is

144

this an obligation of the divine order? If so, where
is it to be read ? In Scripture it cannot be looked
for. In tradition it is not to be found. In history
we have the direct reverse. We find the Pontiffs
witnessing, teaching, deciding by the authority of
Peter. We find the Episcopate appealing to their
judgments as final. We find the faith of Peter,
taken not only by the faithful, but also by the
bishops, as the rule of faith, and the text of what
is to be believed by all the world.

If the concurrence of the Episcopate with its Head
be ' the most certain means ' of avoiding error, because
it is the full, ultimate, and, so to speak, exhaustive
act of infallible judgment, nevertheless the privilege
of stability in faith divinely granted to the See and
Successor of Peter is a certain means of avoiding
error ; and that certainty, though extensive it be not
adequate to the certainty of the whole Church, which
included always the See and Successor of Peter,
is nevertheless intrinsically and by divine ordination
certain, to the exclusion of the possibility of error.

Why, then, is the Pontiff bound to take 4 the most
certain means/ when a means divinely certain also
exists? And why is he bound to take a means
which demands an (Ecumenical Council or a world-
wide and protracted interrogation, with all the delays
and uncertainties of correspondence, when, by the
divine order, a certain means in the Apostolic See
is always at hand? For instance, was Innocent X.
bound to consult the whole episcopal body before he
condemned Jansenius? or Alexander VIII., when he
condemned the 'Peccatum Philosophicum ' ? or Sixtus

145

IV., when he condemned as heretical the proposition
that c the Church of the City of Rome may err ' ?

It would seem to me that if any such obligation
exists, or if declarations ex cathedrd are only certain
when the episcopal body has been consulted, then the
action of the Pontiffs, from Innocent I. to Pius IX.,
has been out of course ; and their doctrinal judgments
fallible always, except when the Episcopate concurred
in them; and for that reason almost always uncertain,
because, except in a few cases, we cannot be certain,
by explicit proof, whether the episcopal body has
concurred in those judgments or no.

I know of no Ultramontane opinion with which this
theory can be reconciled. The Ultramontane opinion
is simply this, that the Pontiff speaking ex catliedrd,
in faith or morals, is infallible. In this there are no
shades or moderations. It is simply aye or no. But
the opinion we have been examining affirms the Pontiff
to be infallible, only when the episcopal body concurs
in his judgments. But if the episcopal body have
not pronounced or even examined the subject-matter,
as, for instance, in the question of the 'Peccatum Philo-
sophicum,' or in the Jansenistic propositions, or in
the questions ' De Auxiliis ; ' I would ask, are then the
judgments of the Pontiff either not ex cathedra, or if
ex cathedra, are they not infallible ? But if they are
not infallible they may be erroneous, and if the Pontiff
in such judgments may err once, he might err always,
and therefore cannot ever be infallible. I see no means
of reconciling this opinion with that of any Ultramon-
tanes, however moderate. They are frontibus adversis
pugnantia. With all my heart, I desire to find a mode

146

of conciliation : not a via media, which is the essential
method of falsehood, but any intellectual analysis
and precise mental conception which might satisfy
the mind of Mgr. Maret as to the infallibility of the
See and of the Successor of Peter. I cannot but
add in passing that much confusion seems to me to
arise from this whole notion of t moderate opinions.'

The Pontifical judgments ex cathedra must be either
fallible or infallible. If it be immoderate or exagge-
rated to affirm them to be infallible, how is it not
equally immoderate or exaggerated to deny their
infallibility? Either way the affirmation and the
denial are equally absolute, trenchant, and peremp-
tory. I see just as much, and just as little, moderation
in the one as in the other. Either both are moderate
or neither. And yet those who affirm the Pontifical
infallibility are held up as warnings, and they who
deny it as examples ; the latter as patterns of mode
ration, the former as exaggerated and extreme. But
they are both in extremes. Aye and no are equally
exclusive, and admit of no degrees.

Is it not the truth that moderation is a quality, not
of the intellect but of the moral nature ? Certainty
admits of no degrees. Doubt may; but certainty
excludes doubt and all its gradations. To be mode-
rate, cautious, forbearing, self-mistrusting, and con-
siderate of opponents in all doubtful matters, is a
virtue ; but in matters that are certain, to fail in saying
that they are so, is to betray the truth. To treat
certainties as uncertainties in mathematics is not
intellectual, in revelation is unbelief. The only
moderation possible in matters of theological certainty

147

is to speak the truth in charity, aX?j0sus*i/ lv ayawj ; to
diminish the precision of truths which are certain, or
to suffer them to be treated as dubious, or to veil them
by economies, or to modify them to meet the preju-
dices of men or the traditions of public opinion, is
not moderation, but an infidelity to truth, and an
immoderate fear, or an immoderate respect for some
human authority.

Mgr. Maret further declares: lWe do not combat
the Pontifical authority, except so far as it is identified
with the system of the pure, indivisible, and absolute
monarchy of the Roman Pontiff, and so far as his
absolute monarchy and his personal infallibility are
made one exclusive whole.'

Once more I am afraid of doing injustice to the
Bishop of Sura. If I understand the doctrine which
I suppose I must now call Ultramontane, but would
rather call, as all the schools of Christendom do,
Catholic, it is this — that the supreme and ultimate
power, both in jurisdiction and in faith, or the clavis
jurisdictionis and the clavis scientice, was committed
first and for ever to Peter, and in him, as the Council
of Florence says, to his Successors. The Episcopate
succeeding to the Apostolate received, servatd pro-
portione, a participation of the pastoral care and of
the endowments of the Church. What Peter was
to the Apostles, the Pontiffs are to the bishops.
What they have in part, he has in plenitude. I am
unable to see that the primacy and infallibility of
Peter in any way lessened or detracted from the
authority and endowments of the Apostles; nor does
it appear how the authority and endowment of his

148

Successor shall lessen or detract from those of the
Episcopate. Bishops are not less authoritative be-
cause their Head is more so. Bishops are not less
judges of doctrine in an (Ecumenical Council because
their Head, in the intervals between Council and
Council, is, by Divine assistance, guided and sustained
so that he shall not err in interpreting the faith and
expounding the law of God. It is in behalf of the
whole Church, pastors and people, that the Spirit of
God preserves from error the Head, on whom all so
depend, that an error in his guidance would mislead
the whole flock, or break the Divine unity of the
Church, or undermine the witness and the magisterium
of the universal Church. Bishops are not elevated
by the depression of their chief. The least bishop in
the world feels himself elevated and strengthened by
the belief that the words 4 Ego rogavi pro te ' were
spoken to his Chief and Head, and that, in union with
him, and through him, he is confirmed in the infal-
lible faith of Peter. I know of no monarchy pure
and absolute beyond this.

To sum up the comparison of these two opinions.
The opinion of Mgr. Maret would seem to place the
infallibility of the Church in the whole body as its
proper residence, and by result in its Head.

The doctrine here maintained is that infallibility
was communicated by the Divine Head of the Church
to Peter as His visible representative and Vicar upon
earth, and through him to his Successors and to the
Church for ever.

In virtue of this order the Church is always infal-
lible, both actively in teaching and passively in
believing.

149

In its active infallibility it is secured from error,
whether dispersed, as it is always, throughout the
world, or congregated, as it rarely is, in Council.
Only eighteen times in eighteen hundred years has it
met in Council ; but through all those eighteen cen-
turies its active infallibility has been, not intermittent
but continuous, both in its Episcopate with its Head,
and in its Head as Universal Pastor and Teacher,
both of pastors and flock.

The stability, indefectibility, or infallibility of the
faith of Peter are three modes of expressing the
same Divine fact.

If this be monarchy pure, indivisible, and absolute,
then I fear I must come under the author's censure,
though I cannot admit its justice or understand its
terms. If Mgr. Maret does not intend to condemn this,
then, I think, I will even hope that his learned mind has
suffered some illusion, perhaps arising from a want of
precision in some who are opponents, and from a want
of chastened language in those who are about him. I
most sincerely and ardently share in his desire to
see all divergences corrected in the enunciation of
truth, pure, clear, and lucid as the river of the water
of life. I have consciously no thought in my heart
but to promote this unity of mind and will ; and in
what I have written, if there be a word to wound
save where truth compels it, I hereby record my
desire to blot it out.

Stability signifies the immovable firmness of the
Faith in standing against all assaults of power and
force: indefectibility^ the imperishable vitality and
light of faith, which can never fail : infallibility,

150

the unerring discernment of truth in detecting and
destroying falsehood in the midst of the intellectual
aberrations of the Christian world. These three
endowments are various in their operations, but
identical in their nature and their source. It is
the perpetual Divine assistance, derived from the
perpetual presence of the Spirit of Truth in the
Church, which sustains the Faith of the See and
of the Successor of Peter, stable, indefectible, and
infallible; that is, in one word, ' Yesterday and to-day
and the same for ever/

I do not know how other minds may be affected
by the history of Christianity, in which, as I have
very briefly shown, the eyes of men and of nations
in all lands were always turned to the See and the
Successor of Peter as the centre and source of this
stable, indefectible, and infallible faith. To me this
manifests the ' Privilegium Petri ' with the evi-
dence of light. Two hundred and fifty-seven Pon-
tiffs in unbroken line have witnessed, taught, and
judged in causes of faith. Against three only do the
modern adversaries of the Pontifical infallibility bring
charge of heterodoxy. Two hundred and fifty-four
stand unchallenged in their immutable stability of
faith. Of those three, two, Liberius and Vigilius, are
not charged with heresy. Whatever be the fault of
Honorius, supineness or hesitation, heterodox he was
not; heretical he could not be, for his own letters
remain to prove the orthodoxy of his teaching. But
these three are all that the most relentless adversaries
of the ' Privilegium Petri ' have ever been able to ad-
duce. To my mind, these threads of mist upon the

151

world-wide splendour of two hundred and fifty-seven
Successors of Peter, in no way affect the confidence
with which we say of them in S. Leo's words :
c Soliditas enim ilia, quam de Petra Christo etiam
ipse Petra factus accepit, in suos quoque se trail sfudit
haeredes ; ' * and of his See in the words of prophecy :
4 Thronus ejus sicut sol in conspectu meo et sicut
luna perfecta in asternum ; et testis in ccelo fidelis.'f

* Bellarm. De Summo Pontif. lib. iv. cc. viii. to xiv. In die
Assumpt. Serm. v. cap. 4.
f Psalm Ixxxviii.

THE VATICAN COUNCIL

AND ITS DEFINITIONS:

A PASTORAL LETTER TO THE CLERGY

HENRY EDWARD

AECHBISHOP OF WESTMINSTER.

LONDON :

LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.

1870.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.
The World and the Council.

External history of the Council, 2 ; The alleged indifference to
the Council, 13 ; Internal history, 24 ; Protest of the Cardinal
Presidents, 33; Definition by acclamation, 36; Definitions
binding on all the faithful, 39.

CHAPTER II.
The Two Constitutions.

Analysis of the Constitution De Fide Catholica, 43 ; Preparation
for the definition of the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, 51 ;
Analysis of the First Constitution on the Church of Christ, 54 ;
Six. points of the definition of Infallibility, 57.

I. Meaning of the phrase loqui ex cathedra, 58.

II. Faith and morals the object of Infallibility, 59 ; Five points
of the Charter of the Church : 1. The perpetuity and universality
of the mission of the Church as a Teacher of mankind. 2. The
deposit of the Divine Faith and Law entrusted to the Church.

3. The Church the sole interpreter of the Faith and of the Law.

4. The Church the sole Divine Judge over the reason and will of
man. 5. The Perpetual Presence of our Lord with the Church,
59. The doctrinal authority of the Church not confined to
matters of revelation, 67 ; Truths of Science, 67 ; Truths of
History, 68 ; Dogmatic Facts, 68, 69 ; Minor censures, 73.

VI CONTENTS.

III. The efficient cause of Infallibility, 79 ; Witness of St.
Ambrose, A.D. 397, 79 ; Witness of St. John Chrysostom, A.D.
407, 80 ; Witness of St. Augustine, A.D. 430, 80 ; Witness of St.
Cyril, A.D. 444, 80; Witness of St. Leo, A.D. 460, 81; Witness
of St. Gelasius, A.D. 496, 81; Witness of Pelagius II., A.D.
590, 81; Witness 'of St. Gregory the Great, A.D. 604, 82;
Witness of Stephanus Dorensis, A.D. 649, 82 ; Witness of St.
Vitalian, A.D. 669, 83.

IV. The Acts to which the divine assistance is attached, 86.

V. The extension of the Infallible authority to the limits of the
doctrinal office of the Church, 90.

VI. The dogmatic value of Pontificial acts ex cathedra, 91.

CHAPTER III.

The Terminology of the Doctrine of Infallibility.

Personal, 94, 112; Independent, 97,113; Separate, 98, 113 ;
Absolute, 102, 113.

CHAPTER IV.

Scientific History and the Catholic Rule of Faith.

Evidence of history, and the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff,
114; Cumulus of evidence for the Infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff undiminished by historical doubts, 116; Difficulties of
human history, 119; The German Bishops at Fulda, 120;
Heretical assumptions of ' scientific history,' 126 ; History im-
properly called a science, 131 ; Definition of science, 131 ;
Theology only improprie a science, 133; Modern Gnosticism,
135.

CHAPTER V.

Result of the Definition.

Bishops witnesses of the objective faith of the Church, 139 ;
Tradition of England, 140 ; Sir Thomas More, 141 ; Cardinal
Fisher, 142 ; Cardinal Pole, 142 ; Harding, 143 ; Campian, 144 ;
Nicholas Sanders, 145; Kellison, 145; Southwell, 147; Alban
Butler, 148 ; Charles Plowden, 149 ; Bishop Hay, 151 ; Bishop
Milner, 151 ; Predicted disasters from the Definition, 152.

CONTENTS. Vll

APPENDIX

I. The Latin Postulatum of the Bishops for the Definition of the
Infallibility, 163; English Translation of the same, 167.

II. Letter of H. B. Cardinal Antonelli to Count Daru, 173.

III. Protest of the Cardinal Presidents, 181.

IV. Constitutio De Fide Catholica, 182 ; Translation of the same,

192 ; Constitutio Dogmatica Prima de Ecclesia Christi, 204 ;
Translation of the same, 211.

V. Rules laid down by Theologians for Doctrinal Definitions, 220.

VI. The Case of Honorius ; Note of the Archbishop of Baltimore
on the question of Honorius, 223.

VII. Letter of the German Bishops on the Council, 225.

THE VATICAN COUNCIL

AND

ITS DEFINITIONS.

CHAPTER I.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL.

REVEREND AND DEAR BRETHREN,

From the opening of the Council until the
close of the Fourth Public Session, when leave was
given to the Bishops to return for a time to their
flocks, I thought it my duty to keep silent. It
was not indeed easy to refrain from contradicting
the manifold errors and falsehoods by which the
Council has been assailed. But it seemed for many
reasons to be a higher duty, to wait until the
work in which we were engaged should be accom-
plished. That time is now happily come: and the
obligation which would have hitherto forbidden the
utterance of much that I might have desired to say
has been by supreme authority removed.

To you therefore, Reverend and dear Brethren, I
at once proceed to make known in mere outline the
chief events of this first period of the Council of the
Vatican.

*« B

Z THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

I shall confine what I have to say to the three
following heads : — First, to a narrative of certain facts
external to the Council, but affecting the estimate of
its character and acts; secondly, to an appreciation
of the internal spirit and action of the Council ; and
thirdly, to a brief statement of the two dogmatic
Constitutions published in its third and fourth
Sessions.

First, as to the external history of the Council.
As yet, no narrative, or official account of its pro-
ceedings, has been possible. The whole world, Cath-
olic and Protestant, has been therefore compelled to
depend chiefly upon newspapers. And as these power-
fully preoccupy and prejudice the minds of men, I
thought it my duty, during the eight months in
which I was a close and constant witness of the
procedure and acts of the Council, to keep pace with
the histories and representations made by the press
in Italy, Germany, France, and England. This,
by the watchful care of others in England and in
Rome, I was enabled to do. In answer to an in-
quiry from this country as to what was to be be-
lieved respecting the Council, I considered it my
duty to reply : * Read carefully the correspondence
from Rome published in England, believe the reverse,
and you will not be far from the truth.' I am sorry
to be compelled to say that this is, above all, true
of our own journals. Whether the amusing blun-
ders and persistent misrepresentations were to be
charged to the account of ill will, or of want of com-
mon knowledge, it was often not easy to say. Two
things however were obvious. The journals of

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 3

Catholic countries, perverse and hostile as they might
be, rarely if ever made themselves ridiculous. They
wrote with great bitterness and animosity : but with
a point which showed that they understood what
they were perverting; and that they had obtained
their knowledge from sources which could only have
been opened to them by violation of duty. Their
narratives of events which were passing under my
own eyes, day by day, were so near the truth, and yet
so far from it, so literally accurate, but so abso-
lutely false, that for the first time I learned to under-
stand Paolo Sarpi's c History of the Council of Trent :'
and foresaw how perhaps, from among nominal
Catholics, another Paolo Sarpi will arise to write the
History of the Council of the Vatican. But none of
this applies to our own country. I am the less dis-
posed to charge these misrepresentations, in the case
of English correspondents, to the account of ill will,
though they abundantly showed the inborn animosity
of an an ti- Catholic tradition, because neither corres-
pondents nor journalists ever willingly expose them-
selves to be laughed at. I therefore put it down to
the obvious reason that when English Protestants un-
dertake to write of an (Ecumenical Council of the
Catholic Church, nothing less than a miracle could
preserve them from making themselves ridiculous.
This, I am sorry to know, for the fair name of our
country, has been the effect produced by English
newspapers upon foreign countries. Latterly, how-
ever, they seemed to have learned prudence, and to
have relied no longer on correspondents who, hardly
knowing the name, nature, use, or purpose of anything

B 2

THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

about which they had to write, were at the mercy
of such informants as English travellers meet at a
table-d'hote in Rome. Then appeared paragraphs
without date or place, duly translated, as we discov-
ered by comparing them, from Italian and German
newspapers. They were less amusing, but they were
even more misleading. By way of preface, I will
give the estimate of two distinguished Bishops, who
are beyond suspicion, as to the truthfulness of one
notorious journal.

Of all the foreign sources from which the English
newspapers drew their inspiration, the chief, perhaps,
was the c Augsburg Gazette/ This paper has many
titles to special consideration. The infamous matter
of Janus first appeared in it under the form of articles.
During the Council, it had in Rome at least one
English contributor. Its letters on the Council have
been translated into English and published by a Pro-
testant bookseller, in a volume by Quirinus.

I refrain from giving my own estimate of the book,
until I have first given the judgment of a distin-
guished Bishop of Germany, one of the minority
opposed to the definition, whose cause the 'Augsburg
Gazette ' professed to serve.

Bishop Von Ketteler, of Mayence, publicly pro-
tested against ' the systematic dishonesty of the cor-
respondent of the "Augsburg Gazette." 4 It is a pure
invention,' he adds, ' that the Bishops named in that
journal declared that Dollinger represented, as to the
substance of the question (of infallibility), the opinions
of a majority of the German Bishops. ' And this, he
said, 4 is not an isolated error, but part of a system

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 5

which consists in the daring attempt to publish false
news, with the object of deceiving the German public,
according to a plan concerted beforehand.' . . . ' It
will be necessary one day to expose in all their
nakedness and abject mendacity the articles of the
" Augsburg Gazette." They will present a formid-
able and lasting testimony to the extent of injustice
of which party men, who affect the semblance of supe-
rior education, have been guilty against the Church.' *
Again, at a later date, the Bishop of Mayence
found it necessary to address to his Diocese another
public protest against the inventions of the 'Augs-
burg Gazette.' ' The "Augsburg Gazette,"' he says,
c hardly ever pronounces my name without appending
to it a falsehood.' ' It would have been easy for us
to prove that every Eoman letter of the u Augsburg
Gazette" contains gross perversions and untruths.
Whoever is conversant with the state of things here,
and reads these letters, cannot doubt an instant that
these errors are voluntary, and are part of a concerted
system designed to deceive the public. If time fails
me to correct publicly this uninterrupted series of
falsehoods, it is impossible for me to keep silence
when an attempt is made, with so much perfidy, to
misrepresent my own convictions, ' f

* The Vatican, March 4, 1870, p. 145.

•f The Vatican, June 17, 1870, p. 319. ' The Archbishop of
Cologne has condemned a pretended Catholic journal in which the
dogma of the Infallibility is attacked, and the proceedings of the
Council misrepresented and vilified. The sentence of the Archbishop
on this matter derives the greater weight from the fact of his having,
as he states, formed part of the minority in the memorable vote of
July 13. The Archbishop says : " The clergy of this Diocese are

b THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Again, Bishop Hefele, commenting on the Roman
correspondents of the i Augsburg Gazette ' says : ' It
is evident that there are people, not Bishops, but

aware that a weekly paper, the Rheinischer Merkur, constantly
attacks, in an odious manner, and with ignoble weapons, the Holy
Church, in the person of its lawful chiefs the Pope and the Bishops,
and in its highest representative the (Ecumenical Council ; so that
men's minds are disturbed, and the hearts of the faithful alienated
from the Church. It also openly advocates the abolition, by th£
secular authority, of the Church's liberty and independence. I
therefore hold it to be my duty, in discharge of my pastoral office,
to expose the anti- Catholic character of the said paper; not because
I regard it as of any greater importance than those other more noisy
organs of the press which are the exponents of hatred against
religion, but simply because the paper above-named pretends to be
Catholic. It is on that account that, as Catholic Bishop of this city,
I feel called upon to denounce the falsehood of the assumption of the
name of Catholic by a journal which is labouring to overthrow the
unity of the Church by separating Catholics from that rock on which
she is founded. This declaration is also due from me to those my
Eight Reverend Brethren in the Episcopate who belonged with me
to the minority in the Council. The journal in question assumes
to be the exponent of the sentiments of that minority, but it never
was in any way, directly or indirectly, recognised by it or any of its
members ; it has been, on the contrary, repeatedly blamed and
denounced. Wherefore I exhort all the Rev. Clergy of the Arch-
diocese to be mindful of their duty as sons of the Catholic Church ;
and not countenance in any way whatsoever, either by taking it in
or reading it, the journal above-named, which outrages our holy
Mother, rejects her authority, and desires to see her enslaved. I
also exhort you on all fitting occasions to warn your flocks of the
dangerous and anti-Catholic character of that journal, so that they
may be dissuaded from buying or reading it, and may escape being
deluded by its errors. I had resolved to order an instruction to be
given from the pulpit upon the more recent decisions of the Council,
and especially upon the infallible teaching of the Pope, and to
explain therein the true sense of the Dogma ; and thus to remove the
prejudices that have been raised against it, as if it were a novel
doctrine or one in contradiction to the end of the Church's con-
stitution, or to sound reason ; and to meet generally the objections
raised against the validity of the Council's decision." '

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. i

having relations with the Council, who are not re-
strained by duty and conscience.' * We had reason to
believe that the names of these people, both German
and English, were well known to us.

Now the testimony of the Bishop of Mayence, as to
the falsehoods of these correspondents respecting
Eome and Germany, I can confirm by my testimony
as to their treatment of matters relating to Rome and
England. I do not think there is a mention of my
own name without, as the Bishop of Mayence says,
the appendage of a falsehood. The whole tissue of the
correspondence is false. Even the truths it narrates
are falsified : and through this discoloured medium
the English people, by the help of Quirinus and the
' Saturday Review,' gaze and are misled.

To relieve this graver aspect of the subject, I will
add a few livelier exploits of our English correspond-
ents. On January 14, an English journal announced
that the Bishops were unable to speak Latin ; and
that Cardinal Altieri (who laid down his life for his
flock in the cholera three years ago), in whose rooms
the Bishops met, 4 was beside himself/ 4 What is
there,' the correspondent of another paper asked, ' in
seven hundred old men dressed in white, and wearing
tall paper caps?' 'The Oriental Bishops,' he says,
4 refused to wear white mitres : ' reasonably, because
they never wear them. 4 The Bishop of Thuii at-
tacked the Bishop of Sura with a violence which
threatened personal collision.' There is no Bishop of
Thun. The same paper, July 7, says, c I was posi-
tively shocked, yesterday, at finding that the Roman
* The Vatican, March 4, 1870, p. 145.

THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Catholic Hierarchy of my own country is a sham ; at
least, so far as regards its territorial and independent
pretensions. Every one of them, including the
Archbishop, is in charge of a Vicar Apostolic, Cardi-
nal Maddalena, titular Archbishop of Corfu, within
whose diocese, it would appear, our island is situated.7
This has more foundation in fact than the other state-
ments, for until the Archbishop of Corfu could find
a carriage, we used daily to go together to the Council.
A leading journal, in May last, announced : ' At a
recent sitting of the Council, Cardinal Schwarzenberg
made a speech which created even a greater uproar
than the former one of Bishop Strossmayer.' In this
speech he defended Protestants with such vigour
that 4 the presiding Legate, Cardinal De Angelis,
interrupted the speaker, and a warm dispute between
the two Cardinals ensued. The President strove
repeatedly, but in vain, to silence the Cardinal with
his bell : and at length the Bishops drowned his protest
in a storm of hisses, in the midst of which the Car-
dinal was carried from the tribune, half fainting with
excitement, to his seat/ The Cardinal was indeed
called to order, but no such tragedy was ever acted.
4 The Papal authorities/ says another journal, ' have
housed the Bishops with discriminating hospitality.
Those who could not be absolutely trusted have
been lodged with safe companions, in the propor-
tion of one weak brother to half-a-dozen strong.'
cThe Jesuits have had the manipulation of the
flock and have done it well.' The distribution of
the Bishops was made by the Government, and
months before the Council opened, with as much

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 9

theological manipulation as the filling of a train
from Paddington. Again, we hear on May 17,
that c Cardinal Bilio, the Prefect of the Depu-
tation for Dogma, and author of the Syllabus, has
passed over to the opposition.' When the Holy
Father heard of this defection ' he was seized with
faintness,' and told the Cardinal c to go on a tour for
the benefit of his health.' The c Times ' at last con-
fessed : c To find out the truth of what is going on
.... is difficult beyond conception.' . . . 4 Every
day, even every hour, brings up its story, ....
which, in nine cases out of ten, will prove an in-
genious hoax.' Therefore nine-tenths of these his-
tories are labelled 4 hoaxes.' The 4 Times ' adds :
c To pick one's way amidst these snares, without
becoming the victims of delusions, is what no man
can feel quite sure of.' A warning of which I hope
the readers of newspapers will fully avail themselves.

The ' Standard,' wiser than its fellows, said in Feb-
ruary : c It is a thousand pities that English corre-
spondents should childishly swallow cock-and-bull
stories of what never did and never could have
occurred in the Council, and thus damage their own
reputation for accuracy, as well as inferentially that
of their colleagues.'

Another journal damaged something more than its
reputation for accuracy, when, after having announced
that the Roman Clergy, that is, the Parish Priests of
Eome, had, all but eight, declined to petition in
favour of the definition, it was again and again called
upon to publish the fact that the Eoman Clergy
unanimously petitioned for the definition, in a form

10 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

so explicit that the Clergy of England and Scotland
afterwards adopted it as their own and presented it
to the Holy Father. The newspaper in question was
never pleased to insert the correction.

But these are flowers plucked at random.

I will now endeavour to give shortly a more con-
nected outline of the Vatican Council, as drawn by
the newspapers of the last eight or nine months ; and
as their representations will be one day read up as
contemporaneous records for a future history, I wish to
leave in the Archives of the Diocese a contemporane-
ous record of their utter worthlessness, and, for the
most part, of their utter falsehood.

As the highest point attracts the storm, so the
chief violence fell upon the head of the Vicar of
Jesus Christ. On this I shall say nothing. Pos-
terity will know Pius the Ninth ; and the world
already knows him now too well to remember, except
with sorrow and disgust, the language of his enemies.
4 If they have called the master of the house Beelze-
bub, how much more them of his household ? ' No
one has this privilege above the Vicar of the Master;
and it is a great joy and distinct source of strength
and confidence to all of the household to share this
sign, which never fails to mark those who are on His
side against the world.

The Council was composed, at first, of 767 Fathers.
We were told that their very faces were such as to
compel an enlightened correspondent, at the first
sight of them, to lament ' that the spiritual welfare of
the world should be committed to such men.'

Then, by a wonderful disposition of things, for the

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 11

good, no doubt, of the human race, and above all of
the Church itself, the Council was divided into
a majority and a minority: and, by an even more
beneficent and admirable provision, it was so ordered
that the theology, philosophy, science, culture, in-
tellectual power, logical acumen, eloquence, candour,
nobleness of mind, independence of spirit, courage,
and elevation of character in the Council, were all to be
found in the minority. The majority was naturally
a Dead Sea of superstition, narrowness, shallowness,
ignorance, prejudice ; without theology, philosophy,
science, or eloquence ; gathered from 4 old Catholic
countries;' bigoted, tyrannical, deaf to reason; with
a herd of ' Curial and Italian Prelates,' and mere
' Vicars Apostolic/

The Cardinal Presidents were men of imperious
and overbearing character, who by violent ringing of
bells and intemperate interruptions cut short the
calm and inexorable logic of the minority.

But the conduct of the majority was still more
overbearing. By violent outcries, menacing gestures,
and clamorous manifestations round the tribune, they
drowned the thrilling eloquence of the minority, and
compelled unanswerable orators to descend.

Not satisfied with this, the majority, under the pre-
text that the method of conducting the discussions
was imperfect, obtained from the supreme authority a
new regulation, by which all liberty of discussion was
finally taken from the noble few who were struggling
to redeem the Council and the Church from bondage.

From that date the non-oecumenicity of the Council
was no longer doubtful. Indeed, ' Janus ' had told

12 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the world in many tongues, long before it met, that
the Council would not be free. Nevertheless, the
minority persevered with heroic courage, logic which
nothing could resist, and eloquence which electrified
the most insensible, until a tyrannous majority, deaf
to reason and incapable of argument, cut discussion
short by an arbitrary exercise of power ; and so
silenced the only voices nobly lifted up for science,
candour, and common sense.

This done, the definition of new dogmas became
inevitable, and the antagonism between the ultra-
romanisrn of a party and the progress of modern
society, between independence and servility, became
complete.

Such is the history of the Council written ab extra
in the last nine months. I believe that every epithet
I have given may be verified in the mass of extracts
now before me.

A leading English journal, ten days after the Defini-
tion of the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff, with great
simplicity observed, c It is curious to compare the very
general and deep interest taken by all intelligent ob-
servers in the early deliberations of the Council with
the equally marked indifference to the culmination
of its labours. Every rumour that came from Rome
six or seven months ago was canvassed with great
eagerness, even by men who cared little for ordinary
theological disputations: while the proclamation of
the astonishing dogma of papal infallibility has pro-
duced in any but ecclesiastical circles little beyond a
certain amount of perfunctory criticism/

The main cause of this contrast is, of course,

THE WOULD AND THE COUNCIL. 13

not far to seek. The writer proceeds to assign the
cause, and in so doing passes at once, with a gravity
befitting the occasion, to a disquisition on Sir Wil-
liam Hamilton's theory of perception, and on ' the
gigantic gooseberry.'

Such is the earnestness and the sincerity with which
English journals, even of high repute, have treated
the subject of the (Ecumenical Council.

Let me, also, assign the cause why the un- Catholic
and anti-Catholic world took so clamorous an interest
in the opening of the Council, and in the end affected
so ill-sustained a tone of indifference. I know of no
public event in our day the explanation of which is
more transparent and self-evident. It is this.

When the Council assembled, it was both hoped and
believed that the 4 Roman Curia ' and the ' Ultramon-
tane party ' would be checked and brought under by
the decisions of the Bishops. A controversy had been
waged against what was termed ' Ultramontanism.,' or
c Ultra- Catholicism,' or 4 Ultra- Romanism,' in Ger-
many, France, and England. When I last addressed
you I used the following words, which I now repeat,
because I can find none more exact. They have
been fulfilled to the very letter.

4 Facts like these give a certain warrant to the as-
sertions and prophecies of politicians and Protestants.
They prove that in the Catholic Church there is a
school at variance with the doctrinal teaching of the
Holy See in matters which are not of faith. But they
do not reveal how small that school is. Its centre
would seem to be at Munich; it has, both in France
and in England, a small number of adherents. They

14 THE VATICAJN COUNCIL.

are active, they correspond, and, for the most part,
write anonymously. It would be difficult to describe
its tenets, for none of its followers seem to be agreed
in all points. Some hold the infallibility of the Pope,
and some defend the Temporal Power. Nothing
appears to be common to all, except an animus of
opposition to the acts of the Holy See in matters out-
side the faith.

4 In this country, about a year ago, an attempt was*
made to render impossible, as it was confidently but
vainly thought, the definition of the infallibility of the
Pontiff, by reviving the monotonous controversy
about Pope Honorius. Later we were told of I know
not what combination of exalted personages in France
for the same end. It is certain that these symptoms
are riot sporadic and disconnected, but in mutual un-
derstanding, and with a common purpose. The anti-
Catholic press has eagerly encouraged this school of
thought. If a Catholic can be found out of tune with
authority by half a note, he is at once extolled for
unequalled authority and irrefragable logic. The
anti-Catholic journals are at his service, and he vents
his opposition to the common opinions of the Church
by writing against them anonymously. Sad as this
is, it is not formidable. It has effect almost alone
upon those who are not Catholic. Upon Catholics its
effect is hardly appreciable ; on the theological Schools
of the Church, it will have little influence; upon the
Oecumenical Council it can have none.' *

Many publications had appeared in French, Eng-

* Pastoral on ' The (Ecumenical Council, 1869,' &c. pp. 132,
133.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 15

lisli, and German, from which it became evident that
a common purpose and plan of co-operation had been
formed. Certain notorious letters published in France,
and the infamous book ' Janus,' translated into Eng-
lish, French, and Italian, proclaimed open war upon
the Council within the unity of the Catholic Church.
This alone was enough to set the whole anti-Catholic
world on fire with curiosity, hope, and delight. The
learning, the science of the intellectual freemen of
the Eoman Church were already under arms to re-
duce the pretensions of Rome.

A belief had also spread itself that the Council
would explain away the doctrines of Trent, or give
them some new or laxer meaning, or throw open some
questions supposed to be closed, or come to a compro-
mise or transaction with other religious systems; or at
least that it would accommodate the dogmatic stiffness
of its traditions to modern thought and modern theo-
logy. It is strange that any one should have forgotten
that every General Council, from Nicrea to Trent, which
has touched on the faith, has made new definitions,
and that every new definition is a new dogma, and
closes what was before open, and ties up more
strictly the doctrines of faith. This belief, however,
excited an expectation, mixed with hopes, that Rome
by becoming comprehensive might become approach-
able, or by becoming inconsistent might become
powerless over the reason and the will of men.

But the interest excited by this preliminary skir-
mishing external to the Council, was nothing com-
pared to the exultation with which the anti-Catholic
opinion and anti-Catholic press of Protestant countries,

16 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and the an ti- Roman opinion and press even of Cath-
olic countries, beheld, as they believed, the formation
of an organised ' international opposition ' of more
than a hundred Bishops within the Council itself.
The day was come at last. What the world could
not do against Rome from without, its own Bishops
were going to do against Rome, and in the world's
service, from within. I shall hereafter show how
little the world knew the Bishops whom it wronged
by its adulation, and damaged by its praise. They
were the favourites of the world, because they were
believed to be fighting the Pope. In a moment, all
the world rose up to meet them. Governments,
politicians, newspapers, schismatical, heretical, in-
fidel, Jewish, revolutionary, as with one unerring
instinct, united in extolling and setting forth the
virtue, learning, science, eloquence, nobleness, heroism
of this i international opposition/ With an iteration
truly Homeric, certain epithets were perpetually
linked to certain names. All who were against Rome
were written up ; all who were for Rome were written
down. The public eye and ear of all countries were
filled, and taught to associate all that is noble and
great with ' the international opposition ; ' all that is
neither noble nor great, not to say more, with others.
The interest was thus wrought up to the highest
pitch; and a confident expectation was raised, and
spread abroad, that the Council would be unable to
make a definition, and that Rome would be defeated.
I can hardly conceive a keener or more vivid motive
of interest to the anti-Catholic world than this. For
this cause Rome was full of correspondents, ' our

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 17

own,' c our special,' and ' our occasional.' Private
persons forsook great interests and duties, to reside
in Rome for the support of the ' international opposi-
tion.' A league of newspapers, fed from a common
centre, diffused hope and confidence in all countries,
that the science and enlightenment of the minority
would save the Catholic Church from the immoder-
ate pretensions of Rome, and the superstitious ignor-
ance of the universal Episcopate. Day after day, the
newspapers teemed with the achievements and ora-
tions of the opposition. The World believed that it
had found its own in the heart of the Episcopate,
and loved it as its own. There was nothing it
might not hope for, expect, and predict. In truth,
it is no wonder that a very intense interest should
be excited in minds hostile to Rome by such a spec-
tacle as the outer world then believed itself to see.
And such, we may safely affirm, were the chief mo-
tives of its feverish excitement, at the opening and
during the early period of the Council.

But how shall we account for the indifference with
which the World affects to treat its close?

By two very obvious reasons. First, because it
became gradually certain that the World had not
found its own in the Council ; and that the c opposition '
on which it counted were riot the servants of the
World, but Bishops of the Catholic Church, who,
while using all freedom which the Church abundantly
gave them, would in heart, mind, and will, remain
faithful to its divine authority and voice. And
secondly, because it became equally certain, indeed
was self-evident, that no opposition, from without or

18 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

from within, could move the Council a hair's breadth
out of the course in which it was calmly and irre-
sistibly moving to its appointed work.

The hopes and confidence of the miscellaneous
alliance of nominal Catholics, Protestants, rational-
ists, and unbelievers, received its first sharp check
when some five hundred Fathers of the Council de-
sired of the Holy See that the doctrine of the Infalli-
bility of the Roman Pontiff should be defined.* This
event manifested a mind and a will so united and so
decisive, as to reduce the proportions of the oppo-
sition, both numerically and morally, to very little.
Still it was confidently hoped that some event, in the
chapter of accidents, might yet hinder the definition ;
that either the minority might become more power-
ful by increase, or the majority less solid by division.

This expectation again was rudely shaken by the
unanimous vote of the third public Session. The
first Constitution De Fide had been so vehemently
assailed, and, as it was imagined, so utterly defeated,
that if ever voted at all it would be voted only by a
small majority, or at least it would be resisted by
an imposing minority. It was therefore no small
surprise that the whole Council, consisting then of 664
Fathers, should have aifirmed it with an unanimous
vote. I well remember that when the ' Placets ' of the
6 opposition leaders ' sounded through the Council
Hall, certain high diplomatic personages looked signifi-
cantly at each other. This majestic unanimity, after
the alleged internal contentions of the Council, was as
perplexing as it was undeniable. The World began
to fear that, after all, the international opposition

* See Appendix, p. 1G3.

THE WOKLD AND THE COUNCIL. 19

would neither serve its purposes nor do its work. A
sensible change of tone was then perceived. The cor-
respondents wrote of everything but of this unanimity.
The newspapers became almost silent. The leading
articles almost ceased. From that time they ex-
changed the tone of confidence and triumph for a
tone of irritation and of no little bitterness.

Nevertheless, a new hope arose. Governments
were acted upon to make representations, and all but
to menace the Holy Father.* For a time, confidence
revived. It was thought impossible that the joint
note of so many Powers, and the joint influence of so
many diplomatists, could fail of their effect. It did
not seem to occur to those who invoked the inter-
ference of the Civil Powers that they were thereby en-
deavouring to deprive the Council of its liberty : which,
in those who were complaining, in all languages, that
the Council was not free, involved a self-contradiction
on which I need not comment. Neither did they seem
to remember that those who invoke the secular power
against the spiritual authority of the Church, whether
to defeat a sentence already given, or to prevent the
delivery of such a sentence, are ipso facto excommuni-
cate, and that their case is reserved to the Pope.f This,

* See Appendix, p. 173.

j" Appellantes sen recurrentes ad curiam scecularem ab ordina-
tionibus alicujus judicis ecclesiastici excommunicationem incurrant
Papa? reservation ex cap. 16 Bullee In Ccena Domini, sive illi
judices ecclesiastici sint ordinarii sive delegati, ut patet in eadem
Bulla: et mu^i dieunt hoc procedere, etiamsi sic appellantes et
recurrentes nulla decreta poerialia aut inhibitiones contra eosdem
judices ecclesiasticos obtineant ; alii tamen contrarium tenent.
Vide interpretes super dicta Bulla cap. 19, etBonacina de Censur. in
partic. disp. 1 , q. 17, pnnct. 1, num. 28, qni auctores pro utraque parte

20 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

which applies to any ordinary ecclesiastical judge in
matters of law, surely applies in an eminent degree to
an (Ecumenical Council in matters of faith. Be this
as it may, for a time the interest of the World was re-
awakened by the hope that Rome would be in some
way baffled after all.

But this hope also was doomed to disappointment.
The distribution by the Cardinal Presidents of the
Additamentum, or additional chapter on the doctrine
of Infallibility; the introduction of the Schema de
Eomano Pontifice before the Schema de Ecclesia;
the closing of the general discussion by a vote of
the Council ; all alike showed that the Council knew
its own mind, and was resolved to do its duty. It
became unmistakably clear how few were in oppo-
sition; and equally certain that, when the defini-
tion should be completed, all opposition would cease.
The interest in the Council, manifested by the anti-
Catholic World, at once collapsed. The correspond-
ents became silent, or only found reasons why no-
body cared any longer for the Council. A period of
supercilious disdain followed; and then the corre-
spondents of the English journals, one by one, left
Rome. The game was played out : and the last hope
of an intestine conflict in the Church was over. A

allegat. Et continet etiam judices seculares, qui ea occasione
decernunt contra dictos judices ecclesiasticos, et eos qui ilia
decreta exequuntur ; et continet dantes consilium, patrociniuni, et
favorem in eisdem, ut patet ex eadera Bulla.

In hac materia vide plures poenas infra verb. Curia, c. 8, et verb.
Jurisdictio^ et procedit etiam in tacita, seu anticipata appellatione ad
procurandum impediri futuras ordinationes judicii ecclesiastici, ut
Bonac. num. 23, juxta probabiliorem. — Giraldus de Pcenis Eccl.
pars ii. c. iii. vol. v. p. 96.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 21

more disappointing end to the high hopes and excited
anticipations with which the adversaries of the Cath-
olic Church cheered on the opposition at the open-
ing of the year, cannot be conceived. They little
knew the men whom they were mortifying and dis-
honouring by their applause. They forgot that
Bishops are not deputies, and that an (Ecumenical
Council is not a Parliament. And when, of the
eighty-eight who on the thirteenth of July voted Non
placet, two only repeated their Non placet on the
eighteenth, proving thereby that what two could do
eighty might have done, the World was silent, and
has steadfastly excluded the Constitution De Ro-
mano Pontifice from the columns of its newspapers.

Here is the simple and self-evident reason of this
pretended loss of interest in the Council. It is the
affected indifference of those who, having staked their
reputation on the issue of a contest, have been
thoroughly and hopelessly disappointed.

Before I conclude this part of the subject, I will
give one passage as a supreme example of what I
have been describing. I take it from the chief
newspaper in England. It is from an article evi-
dently written by a cultivated and practised hand.
It appeared when the definition was seen to be
certain and near. It was intended to ruin its effects
beforehand. The writer could not narrate what had
taken place, because it was before the event ; nor what
would really take place, because nothing was known :
but what he thought would excite contempt, that he
pleased to say would take place. Nevertheless, he
spoke as if the events were certain, and already so

22 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

ordered ; which truth forbade : and he taxed his in-
genuity to make the whole account in the highest de-
gree odious or ridiculous ; which revealed his motive.
The reader will bear in mind that not one particle of
the following elaborate description is true, or had
even a shadow of truth. But nobody would perceive
the fine verbal distinctions on which the writer
would defend himself from a charge of deliberate
falsehood.

On June 8, we read as follows : —

4 The British public have some reason to regret
that the pressure of subjects nearer home, and more
directly concerning this country, has put their in-
terest in the (Ecumenical Council somewhat in abey-
ance. A great event is at hand. There can no
longer be any doubt that at the approaching Feast
of St. Peter and St. Paul, the 29th instant, the
priceless blessing of Papal Infallibility will be vouch-
safed to the world. The day is the Feast of St.
Peter in our Calendar, and it is usually called St.
Peter's Day at Rome, the Apostle to the Gentiles
having been associated only to disappear. The day
is on this occasion to be observed as a day of days,
and the era of a new revelation. Fireworks, illu-
minations, transparencies, triumphal arches, and all
that taste and money can do to demonstrate and
delight, are already in hand, and, whoever the guests,
the marriage feast is in preparation. . . . An extra-
ordinary effort is to be made. Rome is to excel
herself in her mimic meteors, her artistic transfigura-
tions, her new heavens and new earths, her angelic
radiance, her divine glories, and infernal horrors.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 23

If the Council has been chary of its utterances and
coy in its appearances, that will be made up by
explosions and spectacles of a more intelligible cha-
racter. We can promise that it will be worth many
miles of excursion trains to go and see. The Cam-
pagna will be deserted, that all the Pope's temporal
lieges may be there in their picturesque costumes.
They and the astonished strangers will there see
with their own eyes the . Pope of Kome, the actual
successor of St. Peter, invested with absolute autho-
rity over all souls, hearts, and minds. They will see
him welcoming the faithful " Placets" and consigning
the " Non-Placets " to the flames of a Tartarean abyss.
They will see hideous forms, snakes, dragons, hydras,
centipedes, toads, and nondescript monsters under
the feet, or the lance, or the thunderbolt of conquer-
ing Rome ; and they will not fail to recognise in
them the Church of England, the Protestant com-
munities, and the German philosophers. It will be
a grand day, and great things will be done on that
29th of June. We will not believe it possible that
a single mishap will disturb the sacred programme
— that the lightnings may miss their aim, or the
Powers of Darkness prevail. We cannot doubt
all will go off well, for the simple reason that all is
ready and forecasted, down to the very Dogma.
Artists of surpassing skill and taste are working
hard on the upholstery of the Divine manifestation,
not knowing whether to think it a blasphemy or a
good joke. It is their poverty and not their will
that consents to the task. As we see the illumina-
tions expiring, the Roman candles lost in smoke,

24 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

and the exhibitors taking the old properties "back to
the vast magazines of Rome, we cannot help thinking
of the poor fathers put off with glare and noise in
place of conviction or peace of mind. Think of poor
MacHale exhausting in vain his logic, his learning,
and his powerful style, and taking back to his poor
flock on the Atlantic shore a strange story of
Chinese lanterns, fiery bouquets, showers of gold,
and transparencies more striking even than the illus-
trations of our prophetic almanacks.'

When it is borne in mind that the definition of
the Infallibility of the Head of the Christian Church
is a subject of deep religious faith to the most culti-
vated nations of the world, and that a fifth part of
the population of our three kingdoms was profoundly
interested in the subject, I shall not refrain from
saying that this article from the leading newspaper
of England has as little decency as truth.

I will now endeavour briefly to sketch the outline
of the Council as viewed from within. As I was
enabled to attend, with the exception of about three
or four days, every Session of the Council, eighty-
nine in number, from the opening to the close, I can
give testimony, not upon hearsay, but as a personal
witness of what I narrate.

Cardinal Pallavicini, after relating the contests and
jealousies of the Orators of Catholic States assembled
in the Council of Trent, goes on to say that to con-
voke a General Council, except when absolutely de-
manded by necessity, is to tempt God.* I well

* Hist, Cone. Trid. lib. xvi. c. 10, torn. ii. p. 800, Antwerp,
1670.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 25

remember, at the time of the centenary of St. Peter's
Martyrdom, when the Holy Father first announced
his intention to convene the General Council, one of
the oldest and most experienced of foreign diploma-
tists expressed to me his great alarm. He predicted
exactly what came to pass in the beginning of the
Council. His diplomatic foresight fully appreciated
the political dangers. They were certainly obvious
and grave ; for no one perhaps, at that time, could an-
ticipate the majestic unity and firmness of the Council,
which exceeded all hopes, and has effectually dispelled
all fears.

For three hundred years, the Church dispersed
throughout the world has been in contact with the
corrupt civilisation of old Catholic countries, and with
the anti-Catholic civilisation of countries in open
schism. The intellectual traditions of nearly all
nations have been departing steadily from the unity of
the Faith and of the Church. In most countries,
public opinion has become formally hostile to the
Catholic religion. The minds of Catholics have been
much affected by the atmosphere in which they live.
It was to be feared and to be expected that the
Bishops of all the world, differing so widely in race,
political institutions, and intellectual habits, might
have imported into the Council elements of divergence,
if not of irreconcilable division. Some had indeed
met before, at the Canonizations of 1862 or 1867 : but
for the most part the Bishops met for the first time.
The Pastors of some thirty nations were there, bring-
ing together every variety of mental and social culture
and experience : but in the midst of this variety there

26 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

reigned a perfect identity of faith. On this, three
centuries of separation and divergence in all things of
the natural order, had produced no effect. Nothing
but the Church of God alone could have lived on
immutable through three hundred years of perpetual
changes, and under the most potent influences of the
world. Nothing has ever more luminously exhibited
the supernatural endowments of the Church than the
Council of the Vatican. In these three centuries it
had passed through revolutions which have dissolved
empires, laws, opinions. But the Episcopate of the
Catholic Church met again last December in Rome,
as it met in Trent, Lyons, or Nicaea. At once it
proceeded to its work; and began as if by instinct, or
by the prompt facility of an imperishable experience,
to define doctrines of faith and to decree laws of dis-
cipline. Such unity of mind and will is above the
conditions of human infirmity; it can be traced to
one power and guidance alone, the supernatural
assistance of the Spirit of Truth, by Whom the
Church of God is perpetually sustained in the light
and unity of faith.

To those who were within the Council, this became,
day by day, almost evident to sense. It was no di-
minution from this, that a certain number were found
who were of opinion that it was inopportune to define
the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff. This was a
question of prudence, policy, expedience ; not of doc-
trine or of truth. It was thus that the Church was
united twenty years ago in the belief of the Iminacu*
late Conception, while some were still to be found who
doubted the prudence of defining it. Setting aside

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 27

this one question of opportuneness, there was not in the
Council of the Vatican a difference of any gravity,
and certainly no difference whatsoever on any doctrine
of faith. I have never been able to hear of five
Bishops who denied the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
Almost all previous Councils were distracted by di-
visions, if not by heresy. Here no heresy existed.
The question of opportunity was altogether subor-
dinate and free. It may truly be affirmed that never
was there a greater unanimity than in the Vatican
Council. Of this the world had a first evidence in
the unanimous vote by which the first Constitution
on Faith was affirmed on the 24th of April.

I should hardly have spoken of the outward con-
duct of the Council, if I had not seen, with surprise
and indignation, statements purporting to be descrip-
tions of scenes of violence and disorder in the course
of its discussions. Having from my earliest remem-
brance been a witness of public assemblies of all kinds,
and especially of those among ourselves, which for
gravity and dignity are supposed to exceed all others,
I am able and bound to say that I have never seen such
calmness, self-respect, mutual forbearance, courtesy
and self-control, as in the eighty -nine sessions of the
Vatican Council. In a period of nine months, the
Cardinal President was compelled to recall the speak-
ers to order perhaps twelve or fourteen times. In
any other assembly they would have been inexorably
recalled to the question sevenfold oftener and sooner.
Nothing could exceed the consideration and respect
with which this duty was discharged. Occasionally
murmurs of dissent were audible ; now and then a

28 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

comment may have been made aloud. In a very few
instances, and those happily of an exceptional kind,
expressions of strong disapproval and of exhausted
patience at length escaped. But the descriptions of
violence, outcries, menace, denunciation, and even of
personal collisions, with which certain newspapers
deceived the world, I can affirm to be calumnious
falsehoods, fabricated to bring the Council into odium
and contempt. That such has been the aim and in-
tent of certain journals and their correspondents is
undeniable. They at first endeavoured to write it
down ; but an (Ecumenical Council cannot be written
down. Next, they endeavoured to treat it with ridi-
cule ; but an (Ecumenical Council cannot be made
ridiculous. The good sense of the world forbids it.
But it may be made odious and hateful ; and thereby
the minds of men may be not only turned from it,
but even turned against it. For this in every way
the anti-Catholic world has laboured ; and no better
plan could be found than to describe its sessions as
scenes of indecent clamour and personal violence,
unworthy even in laymen, criminal in Bishops of the
Church. I have read descriptions of scenes of which
I was a personal witness, so absolutely contrary to
fact and truth, that I cannot acquit the anonym-
ous writer on the plea of error. The animus was
manifest, and its effect has been and will be to poison
a multitude of minds which the truth will never reach.

It has been loudly declared, that a tyrannical
majority deprived the minority of liberty of dis-
cussion.

Now it is hard to believe this allegation to be
sincere, for many reasons.

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 29

.First, there was only one rule for both majority
and minority. If either were deprived of liberty,
both were ; if both were, it might be unwise, it could
not be unjust; but if both were not, then neither.
The majority spontaneously and freely imposed upon
itself the same conditions it accepted for all.

But secondly, the mode of conducting the discus-
sions afforded the amplest liberty of debate.

The subject matter was distributed in print to
every Bishop, and a period of eight or ten days was
given for any observations they might desire to make
in writing.

These observations were carefully examined by
the deputation of twenty-four ; and when found to be
pertinent were admitted, either to modify or to reform
the original Schema.

The text so amended was then proposed for the
general discussion, on which every Bishop in the
Council had a free right to speak, and the discussions
lasted so long as any Bishop was pleased to inscribe
his name.

The only limit upon this freedom of discussion con-
sisted in the power of the Presidents, on the petition
of ten Bishops, to interrogate the Council whether
it desired the discussion to be prolonged. The Presi-
dents had no power to close the discussion. The
Coun2il alone could put an end to it. This right is
essential to every deliberative assembly; which has a
two-fold liberty, the one, to listen as long as it shall
see fit; the other, to refuse to listen when it shall
judge that a subject has been sufficiently discussed.
To deny this liberty to the Council is to claim for

30 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

individuals the liberty to force the Council to listen
as long as they are pleased either to waste its time or
to obstruct its judgment. In political assemblies, the
house puts an end to debates by a peremptory and
inexorable cry of c question' or c divide.' The assem-
blies of the Church are of another temper. But they
are not deprived of the same essential rights ; and by
a free vote they may decide either to listen, or not to
listen, as the judgment of the Council shall see fit.
To deny this is to deny the liberty of the Council;
and under the pretext of liberty to claim a tyranny
for the few over the will of the many.*

Obvious as is this liberty and right of the
Council to close its discussions when it shall see
fit, there exists only one example on record in which
it did so. With exemplary patience it listened
to what the House of Commons would have pro-
nounced to be interminable discussions and inter-
minable speeches. On the general discussion of
the Schema De Romano Pontifice some eighty

* I cannot help here marking a historical parallel. Those who
had been invoking the anti-Catholic public opinion, and even the
civil governments of all countries, to control the H!oly See and the
Council, complained of oppression and the violation of their liberty.

When Napoleon held Pius VII. prisoner at Fontainebleau, and by
every form of threat and influence had deprived him of liberty, the
following warning was given by Colonel Lagorse to Cardinal Pacca,
then in attendance on the Pope : ' That the Emperor was displeased
with the Cardinals, for having,ever since their arrival at Fontainebleau,
continually restricted the Pope from a condition of free agency ;
that provided they were desirous of remaining at Fontainebleau, they
must abstain from all manner of interference in matters of busi-
ness. . . . Failing in the above conditions, they would expose
themselves to the hazard of losing their liberty.' — Memoirs of
Cardinal Pacca, vol. ii. p. 192.

TH2 WORLD AND THE COUNCIL 31

Bishops had spoken. Of these, nearly half were of
what the newspapers called the Opposition ; but the
proportion of the Opposition to the Council was not
more than one sixth. They had therefore been heard
as three to six. But further, there still remained the
special discussion on the Procemium and the four
chapters; that is to say, five distinct discussions still
remained, in which every Bishop of the six or seven
hundred in the Council would, therefore, have a right
to speak five times. Most reasonably, then, the
Council closed the general discussion, leaving to the
Bishops still their undiminished right, if they saw fit,
still to speak five times. No one but those who de-
sired the discussion never to end, that is, who desired
to render the definition impossible by speaking against
time, could complain of this most just exercise of its
liberty on the part of the Council. I can conscien-
tiously declare, that long before the general discussion
was closed, all general arguments were exhausted.
The special discussion of details also had been to
such an extent anticipated, that nothing new was
heard for days. The repetition became hard to bear.
Then, and not till then, the President, at the petition
not of ten, but of a hundred and fifty Bishops at least,
interrogated the Council whether it desired to prolong
or to close the general discussion. By an over-
whelming majority it was closed. When this was
closed, still, as I have said, five distinct discussions
commenced; and were continued so long as any one
was to be found desirous to speak. Finally, for the
fifth or last discussion, a hundred and twenty inscribed
their names to speak. Fifty at least were heard,

32 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

until on both sides the burden became too heavy to
bear; and, by mutual consent, an useless and endless
discussion, from sheer exhaustion, ceased.

So much for the material liberty of the Council.
Of the moral liberty it will be enough to say, that
the short-hand writers have laid up in its Archives a
record of discourses which will show that the liberty
of thought and speech was perfectly unchecked. If
they were published to the world, the accusation
would not be of undue repression. The wonder would
be, not that the Opposition failed of its object, but that
the Council so long held its peace. Certain Bishops
of the freest country in the world said truly : 'The
liberty of our Congress is not greater than the liberty
of the Council.' When it is borne in mind that out of
more than six hundred Bishops, one hundred, at the
utmost, were in opposition to their brethren, it seems
hardly sincere to talk of the want of liberty. There
was but one liberty of which this sixth part of the
Council was deprived, a liberty they certainly would
be the last to desire, namely, that of destroying the
liberty of the other five. The Council bore long with
this truthless accusation of politicians, newspapers, and
anonymous writers; and never till the last day, when
the work in hand was finally complete, except only
the voting of the public session, took cognisance of
this mendacious pretence. On the 16th of July, after
the last votes had been given, and the first Con-
stitution De Ecdesia Christi had been finally ap-
proved, then for the first time it turned its attention
to this attempt upon its authority. Two calumnious
libels on the Council had appeared ; the one entitled,

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 33

Ce qui se passe au Concile, the other, La derniere
heure du Concile : in both, the liberty of the Vatican
Council was denied, with a view to denying its
authority. The General Congregation by an im-
mense majority adopted the following protest, and
condemned these two slanderous pamphlets, thereby
placing on record a spontaneous declaration of the
absolute freedom of the Council.

4 MOST REVEREND FATHERS,

4 From the time that the Holy Vatican Synod
opened by the help of God, a most bitter warfare
instantly broke out against it; and in order to
diminish its venerable authority with the faithful,
and, if it could be, to destroy it altogether, many
writers vied with each other in attacking it by
contumelious detraction, and by the foulest calum-
nies; and that, not only among the heterodox and
open enemies of the Cross of Christ, but also among
those who give themselves out as sons of the
Catholic Church ; and what is most to be deplored,
among even its sacred ministers.

4 The infamous falsehoods which have been heaped
together in this matter in public newspapers of every
tongue, and in pamphlets without the author's name,
published in all places and stealthily distributed, all
men well know ; so that we have no need to recount
them one by one. But among anonymous pam-
phlets of this kind there are two especially, written in
French, and entitled, Ce qui se passe au Concile,
and La derniere heure du Concile, which for the arts
of calumny and the license of detraction bear away

34 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the palm from all others. For in these not only
is the dignity and full liberty of the Council assailed
with the basest falsehoods, and the rights of the Holy
See overthrown, but even the august person of our
Holy Father is attacked with the gravest insults.
Wherefore we, being mindful of our office, lest our
silence if longer maintained, should be perversely
interpreted by men of evil will, are compelled to
lift up our voice, and before you all, Most Reverend
Fathers, to protest and to declare all such things as
have been uttered in the aforesaid newspapers and
pamphlets to be altogether false and calumnious,
whether in contempt of our Holy Father and of
the Apostolic See, or the dishonour of this Holy
Synod, and on the score of its asserted want of
legitimate liberty.

'From the Hall of the Council, the 16th day of
July, 1870.

' PHILIP, CARDINAL DE ANGELIS, President.

'ANTONINUS, CARDINAL DE Luc A.

' ANDREAS, CARDINAL BIZZARI.

4 ALOYSIUS, CARDINAL BILIO.

'HANNIBAL, CARDINAL CAPALTI.'*

We have thus carried down our narrative to the
eve of the Definition, and with one or two general
remarks I will conclude this part of the subject.

A strange accusation has been brought against the
Council of the Vatican, or, to speak more truly, against
the Head of the Church, who summoned it; namely,
that its one object was to define the Infallibility of

* See Appendix, p. 181.

THE WOULD AND THE COUNCIL. 35

the Pope. With the knowledge I have, in common
with a large part of the Episcopate, I am able to give
to this a direct denial. But this denial is not given
as if the admission of the charge would be in any way
inconsistent with the wisdom, dignity, or duty of the
Council. It is simply untrue in fact. Even though
it were true, I should have no hesitation in under-
taking to show that the Council, if it had been assem-
bled chiefly to define the Infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff, would have been acting in strict analogy
with the practice of the Church in the eighteen
(Ecumenical Councils already held.

Each several Council was convened to extinguish
the chief heresy, or to correct the chief evil, of the
time. And I do not hesitate to affirm that the
denial of the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was
the chief intellectual or doctrinal error as to faith,
not to call it more than proximate to heresy, of our
times.

It was so, because it struck at the certainty of the pon-
tifical acts of the last three hundred years ; and weak-
ened the effect of pontifical acts at this day over the
intellect and conscience of the faithful. It kept alive a
dangerous controversy on the subject of Infallibility
altogether, and exposed even the Infallibility of the
Church itself to difficulties not easy to solve. As an
apparently open or disputable point, close to the very
root of faith, it exposed even the faith itself to the
reach of doubts.

Next, practically, it was mischievous beyond mea-
sure. The divisions and contentions of ; Gallicanism '
and c Ultramontanism ' have been a scandal and a

36 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

shame to us. Protestants and unbelievers have been
kept from the truth by our intestine controversies,
especially upon a point so high and so intimately
connected with the whole doctrinal authority of the
Church.

Again, morally, the division and contention on this
point, supposed to be open, has generated more alien-
ation, bitterness, and animosity between Pastors and
people, and what is worse, between Pastor and Pastor,
than any other in our day. Our internal contests
proclaimed by Protestant newspapers, and, worse
than all, by Catholic also, have been a reproach to us
before the whole world.

It was high time to put an end to this ; and if the
Council had been convened for no other purpose, this
cause would have been abundantly sufficient ; if it
had defined the Infallibility at its outset, it would
not have been an hour too soon; and perhaps it would
have averted many a scandal we now deplore. But
this last I say with submission, for the times and
seasons of a Council are put in a power above our
reach.

In the midst of all these graver events and cares,
there were, now and then, some things which gave
rise to hearty, and I hope harmless, amusement. Of
these, one was what may be called the panic fear lest
the definition of the Infallibility of the Pope should
suddenly be carried by acclamation ; and the amusing
self-gratulation of those who imagined that with great
dexterity and address they had defeated this intention.
The acclamation, like the rising of a conspiracy, was
to have taken place first on one day, then, being

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 37

frustrated, on another. The Feast of the Epiphany was
named, then the Feast of St. Joseph, then the Feast
of the Annunciation. But by the masterly tactics of
certain leaders, this conspiracy could never accom-
plish itself. Janus first announced the discovery of
the plot. The minds of men from that time, it
seems, were haunted with it. They lived in per-
petual alarm. They were never safe, they tell us,
from a surprise which would create an article of
faith before they could protest. I refrain, out of re-
spect, from naming the distinguished prelates of
whom our anonymous teachers speak so freely, when
they affirm that at the first general congregation
Papal Infallibility was to be carried by acclamation,
but that 'the scheme was foiled by the tact and
firmness of ' such an one : and that * a similar at-
tempt was projected for a later day (March 19),
when the prompt action of four American prelates
again frustrated the design/ *

Now the truth is, that nobody, so far as my know-
ledge reaches, and I believe I may speak with cer-
tainty, ever for a moment dreamed of this definition
by acclamation. All whom I have ever heard speak
of these rumours were unfeignedly amused at them.
The last men in the Council who would have desired
or consented to an acclamation were those to whom
it was imputed ; and that for a reason as clear as day.
They had no desire for acclamations, because accla-
mations define nothing. They had already had
enough of acclamations in the Council of Chalcedon,
which cried unanimously, 'Peter hath spoken by

* Saturday Reviciv, Aug. 2, 1870.

38 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Leo ; ' and in the Council of Constantinople which
acclaimed, 'Peter hath spoken by Agatho;' and in
the address of the five hundred Bishops at the
centenary of St. Peter in 1867, in which they
unanimously declared that ' Peter had spoken by
Pius:' for they well knew that many, even of those
who joined most loudly in that acclamation, denied
that these words ascribe infallibility to the Successor
of Peter. Experience therefore proved, even if
theology long ago had not, that an acclamation is
not a definition; and that an acclamation leaves the
matter as it found it, as disputable after as it was
before. Nothing short of a definition would satisfy
either reason or conscience ; and nothing but this was
ever for a moment thought of.

Such, then, is a slight outline of the internal history
of this protracted contest. It passed through nine
distinct phases : and it must1 be confessed that they
who desired to avert the definition held their suc-
cessive positions with no little tenacity.

The first attack came from the World without, in
support of a handful of professors and writers, who
denied the truth of the doctrine: the second position
was to admit its truth but to deny that it was capable
of being defined : the third, to admit that it was de-
finable, but to deny the opportuneness of defining it :
the fourth, to resist the introduction of the doctrine
for discussion : the fifth, to render discussion im-
possible by delay : the sixth, to protract the discussion
till a conclusion should become physically impossible
before the summer heats drove the Council to dis-
perse : the seventh, when the discussion closed, to

THE WORLD AND THE COUNCIL. 39

defer the definition to the future : the eighth, after
the definition was made, to hinder its promulgation :
the ninth — I will not say the last, for who can tell
what may still come? — to affirm that the definition,
though solemnly made, confirmed, and published by the
Head of the Church in the (Ecumenical Council, and
promulgated urbi et orbi according to the traditional
usage of the Church, does not bind the conscience of
the faithful till the Council is concluded, and sub-
scribed by the Bishops.

This last is the only remnant of the controversy
now surviving, I can hardly believe that any one,
after the letter of Cardinal Antonelli to the Nunzio
at Brussels, can persist in this error. Nevertheless
it may be well to- add one or two words, which you
wrill anticipate, and well know how to use.

1. A definition of faith declares that a doctrine was
revealed by God.

Are the faithful, then, dispensed from believing
Divine revelation till the Council is concluded, and
the Bishops have subscribed it?

I hope, for the sake of the Catholic religion in the
face of the English people, that we shall hear no more
of an assertion so uncatholic and so dangerous.

2. But perhaps it may mean that the Council is
not yet confirmed, because not yet concluded.

The Council may not yet be confirmed because
not yet concluded ; but the Definition is both con-
cluded and confirmed.

The Council is as completely confirmed, in its acts
hitherto taken, as it ever will or can be. The future
confirmation will not add anything to that which is

40 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

confirmed already. It will confirm future acts, not
those which are already perfect.

3. But perhaps some may have an idea that the
question is not yet closed, and that the Council
may hereafter undo what it has done. We have
been told that ' Its decrees may have to be corrected,'
and that two years elapsed before the (Ecumenical
pretensions of the Latrodnium of Ephesus were
formally superseded. Some have called it ' Ludibrium
Vaticanum.'

Let those who so speak, or think, for many so
speak without thinking, look to their faith. The
past acts of the Council are infallible. No future
acts will retouch them. This is the meaning of ' irre-
formable.' Infallibility does not return upon its own
steps. And they who suspend their assent to its
acts on the plea that the Council is not concluded, are
in danger of falling from the faith. They who reject
the Definitions of the Vatican Council are already in
heresy.

CHAPTER II.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS.

HAVING so far spoken on the less pleasing and less
vital part of this subject, I gladly turn to the authori-
tative acts of the Council.

The subject matter of its deliberations was divided
into four parts, and for each part a Deputation of
twenty-four Fathers was elected by the Council. The
four divisions were, on Faith, Discipline, Religious
Orders, and on Rites, including the Missions of the
Church.

Hitherto, the subjects of Faith and Discipline alone
have come before the Council; and of these two
chiefly the first has been treated, as being the basis of
all, and in its nature the most important.

In what I have to add, I shall confine myself to
the two Dogmatic Constitutions, De Fide and De
Ecclesia Christi.*

The history of the Faith cannot be adequately
written without writing both the history of heresy and
the history of definitions ; for heresies are partial
aberrations from the truth, and definitions are recti-
fications of those partial errors. But the Faith is co-
extensive with the whole Revelation of Truth ; and

* See Appendix, p. 182, etc.

42 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

though every revealed truth is definite and precise,
nevertheless, all are not defined. The need of defini-
tion arises when any revealed truth has been obscured
or denied. The general history of the Church will
therefore give the general history of the Faith; but
the history of Councils will give chiefly, if not only,
the history of those parts of revelation which have
been assailed by heresy and protected by definition.

The Divine Tradition of the Church contains
truths of the supernatural order which without
revelation could not have been known to man, such
as the Incarnation of God and the mystery of the
Holy Trinity, and truths of the natural order which
are known also by reason, such as the existence of
God. The circumference of this Divine Tradition is
far wider than the range of definitions. The Church
guards, teaches, and transmits the whole divine tra-
dition of natural and supernatural truth, but defines
only those parts of the deposit which have been
obscured or denied.

The eighteen (Ecumenical Councils of the Church
have therefore defined such specific doctrines of the
Faith as were contested. The Council of the Vatican
has, for this reason, treated of two primary truths
greatly contested but never hitherto defined : namely,
the Supernatural order and the Church. It is this
which will fix the character of the Vatican Council,
and will mark in history the progress of error in the
Christian world at this day.

The series of heresy has followed the order of the
Baptismal Creed. It began by assailing the nature
and unity of God the Creator; then of the Eedeemer;

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 43

then the doctrine of the Incarnation, of the Godhead
and the Manhood of the Son of God ; then of the Holy
Trinity, and of the personality and Godhead of the
Holy Ghost. To these succeeded controversies on sin,
grace, and the Holy Sacraments; finally the heresies
of the so-called Reformation, which spread over what
remained unassailed in the Catholic Theology, espe-
cially the Divine authority and the institution of the
Church itself. The Councils before Trent have com-
pletely guarded all doctrines of faith hitherto contes-
ted, by precise definition, excepting only the two
primary and preliminary truths anterior to all doc-
trine, namely, the revelation of the supernatural order
and the Divine authority and institution of the Church.
To affirm and to define these seems to be, as I said,
the mission and character of the Vatican Council, and
indicates the state of the Christian world ; because in
the last three hundred years the rapid development of
the rationalistic principle of Protestantism has swept
away all intermediate systems and fragmentary Chris-
tianities. The question is reduced to a simple choice
of faith and unbelief, or, of the natural or the super-
natural order.

This then is the starting-point of the first dogmatic
Constitution, De Fide Catlwlica.

In the Prooemium, the Council declares that none
can fail to know how the heresies condemned at Trent
have been subdivided into a multitude of contending
sects, whereby Faith in Christ has been overthrown in
many; and the Sacred Scriptures, which at first were
avowedly held to be the source and rule of faith, are
now reputed as fables. The cause of this it declares

44 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to be, the rejection of the Divine authority of the
Church, and the license of private judgment.

1 Then sprang up,' it goes on to say, ' and was widely
spread throughout the world, the doctrine of ration-
alism or naturalism, which opposing itself altogether
to Christianity as a supernatural institution, studiously
labours to exclude Christ, our only Lord and Saviour,
from the minds of men and from the life and morality
of nations, and to set up the dominion of what they
call pure reason and nature. After forsaking and re-
jecting the Christian religion, and denying the true
God and His Christ, the minds of many have lapsed
at length into the depth of pantheism, materialism, and
atheism, so that, denying the rational nature of man,
and all law of justice arid of right, they are striving
together to destroy the very foundations of human
society.

4 While this impiety spreads on every side, it miser-
ably comes to pass, that many even of the sons of the
Catholic Church have wandered from the way of
piety, and while truth in them has wasted away, the
Catholic instinct has become feeble. For, led astray
by many and strange doctrines, they have recklessly
confused together nature and grace, human science,
and divine faith, so as to deprave the genuine sense
of dogmas which the Holy Church our Mother holds
and teaches ; and have brought into danger the integ-
rity and purity of the Faith.'

Such is the estimate of the condition of the Chris-
tian world in the judgment of the Vatican Council ;
and from this point of sight we may appreciate its
decrees.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 45

Its first chapter is of God the Creator of all things.*
In this is decreed the personality, spirituality, and
liberty of God, the creation of corporeal and of spiri-
tual beings, and the existence of body and soul in
man. These truths may be thought so primary and
undeniable as to need no definition. To some it may
be hardly credible that, at this day, there should exist
men who deny the existence of God, or His person-
ality, or His nature distinct from the world, or the
existence of spiritual beings, or the creation of the
world, or the liberty of the Divine will in creation.
But such errors have existed and do exist, not only in
obscure and incoherent minds, but in intellects of
power and cultivation, and in philosophies of elaborate
sub til ty, by which the faith of many has been under-
mined.

The second 'Chapter is on Revelation. It affirms
the existence of two orders of truth : the order of
nature, in which the existence of God as the beginning
and end of creatures may be certainly known by the
things which He has made; and the order which is
above created nature, that is, God and His action by
truth and grace upon mankind. The communication
of supernatural truth to man is revelation ; and that
revelation is contained in the Word of God written
and unwritten, or in the divine tradition committed
to the Church. These truths, elementary and cer-
tain as they seem, have been and are denied by errors
of a contradictory kind. By some it is denied that
God can be known by the light of reason ; by others

* The text of the Constitutions will be found in the Appendix,
No. IV.

46 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

it is affirmed not only that God may be known by
the light of reason, but that no revelation is neces-
sary for man ; once more, others deny that man can
be elevated to a supernatural knowledge and perfec-
tion ; again, others affirm that he can attain to all
truth and goodness of. and from himself. These
errors also are widespread ; and in the multifarious
literature which Catholics incautiously admit into
their homes and minds, have made havoc of the faith
of many.

The third Chapter is on Faith. It may be truly
said, that in this chapter every word is directed
against some intellectual aberration of this century.

It affirms the dependence of the created intel-
ligence upon the uncreated, and that this dependence
is by the free obedience of faith ; or, in other words,
that inasmuch as God reveals to man truths of the
supernatural order, man is bound to believe that
revelation by reason of the authority or veracity of
God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived. The
infallibility of God is the motive of faith. And this
faith, though it be not formed in us by perceiving
the intrinsic credibility of what we believe, but by
the veracity of God, nevertheless is a rational or
intellectual act, the highest and most normal in its
nature. For no act of the reason can be more in
harmony with its nature than to believe the Word of
God. To assure mankind that it is God who speaks,
God has given to man signs and evidences of His
revelation, which exclude reasonable doubt. The act
of faith therefore is not a blind act, but an exercise of
the highest reason. It is also an act not of necessity

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. . 47

but of perfect freedom, and therefore in itself an
act of normal obedience to God, and meritorious in
its nature. And this act of faith, in which both the
intellect and the will have their full and normal
exercise, is nevertheless an act not of the natural
order, but of the supernatural, and springs from the
preventing grace of the Holy Spirit, Who illuminates
the intelligence and moves the will. Faith is there-
fore a gift of God, and a moral duty which may be
required of us by the commandment of God.

But inasmuch as the grace of faith is given to man
that he .may believe the revelation of God, it is co-
extensive with that whole revelation. Whatsoever
God has revealed, man, when he knows it, is bound
to believe. But God has made provision that man
should know His revelation, because He has com-
mitted it to His Church as the guardian and teacher
of truth. Whatsoever, therefore, the Church pro-
poses to our belief as the Word of God, written or
unwritten, whether by its ordinary and universal
teaching, or by its solemn judgment and definition,
we are bound to believe by divine and Catholic faith.

To this end, God has instituted in the world His
visible Church, one, universal, indefectible, immut-
able, ever multiplying j the living witness of the
Incarnation, and the sufficient evidence of its own
mission to the world. The maximum of extrinsic
evidence for the revelation of Christianity is the
witness of the Church, considered even as an histori-
cal proof ; and that extrinsic evidence is not only
sufficient to convince a rational nature that Chris-
tianity is a Divine revelation, but to convict of

48 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

unreasonable unbelief any intelligence which shall
reject its testimony. But the visible Church is not
merely a human witness. It was instituted and is
guided perpetually by God Himself, and is there-
fore a divine witness, ordained by God as the infallible
motive of credibility, and the channel of His reve-
lation to mankind.

I need hardly point out what errors are excluded
by these definitions. The whole world outside the
Catholic Church is full of doctrines diametrically
contrary to these truths. It is affirmed that the
reason of man is so independent of God, that He
cannot justly lay upon it the obligation of faith;
again, that faith and science are so identified that
they have the same motives, and that there is neither
need nor place in our convictions for the authority of
God; again, that extrinsic evidence is of no weight,
because men ought to believe only on their own in-
ternal experience or private inspiration ; again, that
all miracles are myths, and all supernatural evid-
ences useless, because intrinsically incredible ; once
more, that we can only believe that of which we have
scientific proof, and that it is lawful for us to call
into doubt the articles of our faith when and as
often as we will, and to submit them to a scientific
analysis, in the meanwhile suspending our faith until
we shall have completed the scientific demonstration.

The fourth and last Chapter is on the relation of
faith to reason. In this three things are declared :
first, that there are two orders of knowledge ; secondly,
that they differ as to their object; thirdly, that they
differ as to their methods of procedure.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 49

The order of nature contains the subject-matter
of natural religion and of natural science. The
order of faith contains truths which without re-
velation we might have known, though not cer-
tainly nor easily; and also truths which, without
revelation, we could not have known. Such then are
the two objects of reason and of faith. The two
methods of procedure likewise differ, inasmuch as
in the order of nature the instrument of knowledge is
discovery ; in the supernatural order, it is faith, and
the intellectual processes which spring from faith.

From these principles it is clear that science and
faith can never be in real contradiction. All seem-
ing opposition can only be either from error as to the
doctrine of the Church, or error in the assumptions
of science. Every assertion, therefore, contrary to
the truth of an illuminated faith, is false.. ' For the
Church, which, together with the Apostolic office of
teaching, received also the command to guard the
deposit of faith, is divinely invested with the right
and duty of proscribing science falsely so-called, lest
any man be deceived by philosophy and vain deceit/
4 For the doctrine of Faith which God has revealed,
was not proposed to the minds of men to be brought
to perfection like an invention of philosophy, but was
delivered to the Spouse of Christ as a divine deposit
to be faithfully guarded, and to be infallibly de-
clared/

The importance of this first Constitution on Catho-
lic Faith cannot be over-estimated, and. from its great

' O

breadth, may not as yet be fully perceived.

It is the broadest and boldest affirmation of the

50 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

supernatural and spiritual order ever yet made in
the face -of the world ; which is now, more than ever,
sunk in sense and heavy with materialism. It de-
clares that a whole order of being and power, of
truth and agency, exists, and is in full play upon
the world of sense. More than this, that this super-
natural and spiritual order is present in the world,
and is incorporated in a visible and palpable form,
over which the world has 110 authority. That God
and His operations are sensible ; visible to the eye,
and audible to the ear. That they appeal to the
reason of man; and that men are irrational, and
therefore act both imprudently and immorally, if they
do not listen to, and believe in the Word of God. It
affirms also, as a doctrine of revelation, that the
visible Church is the great motive of credibility to
faith, and that it is c the irrefragable testimony of its
own divine legation.' It moreover asserts that the
Church has a divine commission to guard the deposit of
revelation, and 4 a divine right to proscribe errors of
philosophy and vain deceit,' that is, all intellectual
aberrations at variance with the deposit of revelation.
Finally, it affirms that the Church has a divine office
to declare infallibly the deposit of truth.

I am not aware that in any previous (Ecumenical
Council the doctrine of the Church, and of its divine
and infallible authority, has been so explicitly defined.
And yet the Council of the Vatican was not at that
time engaged upon the Schema De Ecdesia, which
still remains to be treated hereafter. It was not how-
ever without a providential guidance that the first
Constitution on Catholic Faith was so shaped, espe-

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 51

cially in its closing chapter. Neither is it without a
great significance that at its conclusion was appended
a Monitum, in which the Roman Pontiff by his
supreme authority, enjoins all the faithful, Pastors
and people, to drive away all errors contrary to the
purity of the faith ; and moreover warns Christians
that it is not enough to reject positive heresies, but
that all errors which more or less approach to heresy
must be avoided ; and all erroneous opinions which
are proscribed and prohibited by the Constitutions
and decrees of the Holy See.

When these words were written, it was not foreseen
that they were a preparation, unconsciously made, for
the definition of the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff.
If the first Constitution had been designedly framed
as an introduction, it could hardly have been more
opportunely worded. It begins with God and His
revelation ; it closes with the witness and office of
the Visible Church, and with the supreme authority
of its Head. The next truth demanded by the in-
trinsic relations of doctrine was the divine endow-
ment of infallibility. And when treated, this doctrine
was, contrary to all expectation, and to all likelihood,
presented first to the Council, and by the Council
to the world, in the person and office of the Head of
the Church.

In all theological treatises, excepting indeed one
or two of great authority, it had been usual to treat
of the Body of the Church before treating of its
Head. The reason of this would appear to be, that
in the exposition of doctrine the logical order was the
more obvious; and to the faithful, in the first forma-

E 2

52 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

tion of the Church, the body of the Church was known
before its Head. We might have expected that the
Council would have followed the same method. It is,
therefore, all the more remarkable that tKe Council
inverted that order, and defined the prerogative of the
Head before it treated of the Constitution and en-
dowments of the Body. And this, which was brought
about by the pressure of special events, is not without
significance. The Schools of the Church have fol-
lowed the logical order : but the Church in Council,
when for the first time it began to treat of its own
constitution and authority, changed the method, and,
like the Divine Architect of the Church, began in the
historical order, with the foundation and Head of the
Church. Our Divine Lord first chose Cephas, and
invested him with the primacy over the Apostles.
Upon this Rock all were built, and from him the
whole unity and authority of the Church took its
rise. To Peter alone first was given the plenitude
of jurisdiction and of infallible authority. Afterwards,
the gift of the Holy Ghost was shared with him by all
the Apostles. From him and through him, therefore,
all began. For which cause a clear and precise concep-
tion of his primacy and privilege is necessary to a
clear and precise conception of the Church. Unless
it be first distinctly apprehended, the doctrine of the
Church will be always proportionally obscure. The
doctrine of the Church does not determine the doctrine
of the Primacy, but the doctrine of the Primacy does
precisely determine the doctrine of the Church. In
beginning therefore with the Head, the Council has
followed our Lord's example, both in teaching and in

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 53

fact ; and in this will be found one of the causes of
the singular and luminous precision with which the
Council of the Vatican has, in one brief Constitution,
excluded the traditional errors on the Primacy and
Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff.

The reasons which prevailed to bring about this
change of method were not only those which demon-
strated generally the opportuneness of defining the
doctrine, but those also which showed specially the
necessity of bringing on the question while as yet the
Council was in the fulness of its numbers. It was
obvious that the length of time consumed in the dis-
cussion, reformation, and voting of the schemata was
such, that unless the Constitution De Romano Pon-
tifice were brought on immediately after Easter, it
could not be finished before the setting in of summer
should compel the Bishops to disperse. . Once dis-
persed, it was obvious they could never again re-
assemble in so large a number. Many who, with
great earnestness, desired to share the blessing and
the grace of extinguishing the most dangerous error
which for two centuries has disturbed and divided
the faithful, would have been compelled to go back
to their distant sees and missions, never to return.
It was obviously of the first moment that such a
question should be discussed and decided, not, as we
should have been told, in holes and corners, or by a
handful of Bishops, or by a faction, or by -a clique,
but by the largest possible assembly of the Catholic
Episcopate. All other questions, on which little
divergence of opinion existed, might well be left to a
smaller number of Bishops. But a doctrine which

54 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

for centuries had divided both Pastors and people,
the defining of which was contested by a numerous
and organised opposition, needed to be treated and
affirmed by the most extensive deliberation of the
Bishops of the Catholic Church. Add to this, the
many perils which hung over the continuance of the
Council ; of which I need but give one example. The
outbreak of a war might have rendered the definition,
impossible. And in fact, the Infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff was denned on the eighteenth of July,
and war was officially declared on the following day.

With these and many other contingencies fully
before them, those who believed that the definition
was not only opportune but necessary for the unity
of the Church and of the Faith, urged its immediate
discussion. Events justified their foresight. The
debate was. prolonged into the heats of July, when,
by mutual consent, the opposing sides withdrew
from a further prolonging of the contest, and closed
the discussion. If it had not been already protracted
beyond all limits of reasonable debate, for not less
than a hundred fathers in the general and special
discussions had spoken, chiefly if not alone, of in-
fallibility, it could not so have ended.* Both sides
were convinced that the matter was exhausted.

We will now examine, at least in outline, the first
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ ; and
I will then confine what I have to add to the defini-
tion of Infallibility ; thereby completing a part of the

* During the session of the council 420 speeches were delivered,
of which nearly one-fourth were on the Infallibility alone.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 55

subject which in the two previous Pastorals it would
have been premature to treat.

The Prooemium of the Constitution declares that
the institution of the visible Church was ordained to
preserve the twofold unity of faith and of communion,
and that for this end one principle and foundation
was laid in Peter.

The first Chapter declares the Primacy of Peter
over the Apostles ; and that his primacy was conferred
on him immediately and directly by our Lord, and
consists not only in honour but also in jurisdiction.

The second Chapter affirms this primacy of honour
and jurisdiction to be perpetual in the Church ; and
that the Koinan Pontiffs, as successors of Peter, in-
herit this primacy; whereby. Peter always presides in
his see, teaching and governing the Universal Church.

The third Chapter defines the nature of his jurisdic-
tion, namely, ' to tarn plenitudiriem hujus supreme
potestatis,' the plenitude of power to feed, rule, and
govern the Universal Church. It is therefore a
jurisdiction episcopal, ordinary, and immediate over
the whole Church, over both pastors and people, that
is, over the whole Episcopate, collectively and singly,
and over every particular church and diocese. The
ordinary and immediate jurisdiction which every
several Bishop in the Church exercises in the flock
over which the Holy Ghost has placed him, is thereby
sustained and strengthened.

From this Divine primacy three consequences
follow : the one, that the Roman Pontiff is the supreme
judge over all the Church, from whom lies no appeal ;
the second, that no power under God may come

56 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

between the chief pastor of the Church and any, from
the highest to the humblest, member of the flock of
Christ on earth ; the third, that this supreme power or
primacy is not made up of parts, as the sovereignty
of constitutional states, but exists in its plenitude in
the successor of Peter.*

The fourth and last Chapter defines the infallible
doctrinal authority of the Roman Pontiff as the
supreme teacher of all Christians.

The Chapter opens by affirming that to this supreme
jurisdiction is attached a proportionate grace, whereby
its exercise is directed and sustained.

This truth has been traditionally held and taught
by the Holy See, by the praxis of the Church, and by
the (Ecumenical Councils, especially those in which
the East and the West met in union together, as for
instance the fourth of Constantinople, the second of
Lyons, and the Council of Florence.

It is then declared, that in virtue of the promise of
our Lord, c I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail
not,' f a perpetual grace of stability in faith was
divinely attached to Peter and to his successors in his
See.

The definition then affirms c that the Roman Pon-

* In order to fix this doctrine more exactly, and to exclude all
possible equivocation, after full and ample and repeated discussion,
the words ' aut eum habere tantum potiores partes, non vero totam
plenitudinem hujus supremae potestatis,' were inserted in the Canon
appended to this Chapter. I notice this, because it has been most
untruly and most invidiously said, that these words were interpo-
lated after the discussion. They were fully and amply discussed,
and the proof of the fact exists in the short-hand report of the
speeches, laid up in the Archives of the Council.

| St. Luke xxii. 31, 32.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 57

tiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in dis-
charge of the office of Pastor and Doctor of all Chris-
tians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he
defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be
held by the Universal Church, by the Divine assistance
promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that
infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed
that His Church should be endowed for denning doc-
trine, regarding faith and morals. And that there-
fore such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irre-
formable of themselves, and not from the consent of
the Church.'

In this definition there are six points to be noted.

1. First, it defines the meaning of the well-known
phrase, loquens ex cathedra; that is, speaking from the
Seat, or place, or with the authority of the supreme
teacher of all Christians, and binding the assent of the
Universal Church.

2. Secondly, the subject-matter of his infallible
teaching, namely, the doctrine of faith and morals.

3. Thirdly, the efficient cause of infallibility, that
is, the divine assistance promised to Peter, and in Peter
to his successors.

4. Fourthly, the act to which this divine assistance
is attached, namely, the defining of doctrines of faith
and morals.

5. Fifthly, the extension of this infallible authority
to the limits of the doctrinal office of the Church.

6. Lastly, the dogmatic value of the definitions ex
cathedra, namely, that they are in themselves irre-
formable, because in themselves infallible, and not be-
cause the Church, or any part or member of the
Church, should assent to them.

58 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

These six points contain the whole definition of
Infallibility. I will therefore take them in order,
and then answer certain objections.

I. First, the definition limits the infallibility of the
Pontiff to the acts which emanate from him ex ca-
thedra. This phrase, which has been long and com-
monly used by theologians, has now, for the first time,
been adopted into the terminology of the Church;
and in adopting it the Vatican Council fixes its
meaning. The Pontiff speaks ex cathedra when, and
only when, he speaks as the Pastor and Doctor of
all Christians. By this, all acts of the Pontiff as
a private person, or a private doctor, or as a local
Bishop, or as sovereign of a state, are excluded. In all
these acts the Pontiff may be subject to error. In
one and one only capacity he is exempt from error ;
that is, when, as teacher of the whole Church, he teaches
the whole Church in things of faith and morals.

Our Lord declared, ' Super cathedram Moysi sede-
runt scribe et Pharisee! : ' the scribes and Pharisees
sit in the chair of Moses. The seat or ' cathedra ' of
Moses signifies the authority and the doctrine of
Moses ; the cathedra Petri is in like manner the
authority and doctrine of Peter. The former was
binding by Divine command and under pain of sin,
upon the people of God under the old law; the latter
is binding by Divine command and under pain of sin,
upon the people of God under the new.

I need not here draw out the traditional use of
the term cathedra Petri, which in St. Cyprian, St.
Optatus, and St. Augustine is employed as synony-
mous with the successor of Peter, and is used to

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 59

express the centre and test of Catholic unity. Ex
cathedra is therefore equivalent to ex cathedra
Petri, and distinguishes those acts of the successor
of Peter which are done as supreme teacher of the
whole Church.

The value of this phrase is great, inasmuch as it
excludes all cavil and equivocation as to the acts of
the Pontiff in any other capacity than that of Supreme
Doctor of all Christians, and in any other subject-
matter than the matters of faith and morals.

II, Secondly, the definition limits the range, or, to
speak exactly, the object of infallibility, to the doctrine
of faith and morals. It excludes therefore all other
matter whatsoever.

The great commission or charter of the Church is,
in the words of our Lord, ' Go ye therefore and teach
all nations . . . teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you ; and behold, I
am with you all days, even to the consummation of
the world.'*

In these words are contained five points.

1. First, the perpetuity and universality of the
mission of the Church as the teacher of mankind.

2. Secondly, the deposit of the Truth and of the
commandments, that is, of the Divine Faith and law
entrusted to the Church.

3. Thirdly, the office of the Church, as the sole
interpreter of the Faith and of the Law.

4. Fourthly, that it has the sole Divine jurisdiction
existing upon earth, in matters of salvation, over the
reason and the will of man.

* St. Matthew xxviii. 19, 20.

60 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

5. Fifthly, that in the discharge of this office our
Lord is with His Church always, and to the consum-
mation of the world.

The doctrine of faith, and the doctrine of morals
are here explicitly described. The Church is infal-
lible in this deposit of revelation.

And in this deposit are truths and morals both of
the natural and of the supernatural order; for the
religious truths and morals of the natural order are
taken up into the revelation of the order of grace, and
form a part of the object of infallibility.

1. The phrase, then, ' faith and morals' signifies the
whole revelation of faith ; the whole way of salvation
through faith; or the whole supernatural order, with
all that is essential to the sanctification and salva-
tion of man through Jesus Christ.

Now, this formula is variously expressed by the
Church and by theologians ; but it always means one
and the same thing.

The Second Council of Lyons says, ' if any ques-
tions arise concerning faith,' they are to be decided
by the Roman Pontiff.*

The Council of Trent uses the formula ' in things
of faith and morals, pertaining to the edification of
Christian doctrine.' f

Bellarmine says, ' in things which pertain to faith,'
and again, i The Roman Pontiff cannot err in faith ; '
and further he says, c Not only in decrees of faith the

* ' Si quae stibortae fuerint quaastiones de fide, suo (i.e. Rom. Pont.)
debent judicio definiri.' — Labbe, Condi, torn. xiv. p. 512. Venice,
1731.

t * In rebus fidei et morum ad aadificationem doctrinae Christian®
pertinentium.' — Labbe, Condi, torn. xx. p, 23.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 61

Supreme Pontiff cannot err, but neither (can he err)
in moral precepts which are enjoined on the whole
Church, and which are conversant with things neces-
sary to salvation, or with those which are in them-
selves good or evil.' *

Gregory of Valentia says, ' Without any restric-
tion it is to be said, that whatsoever the Pontiff
determines in controverted matters which have re-
spect to piety, he determines infallibly; when, as it
has been stated, he obliges the whole Church ; ' and
again, ' Whatsoever the Pontiff asserts in any con-
troverted matter of religion, it is to be believed that
he asserts infallibly by his Pontifical authority, that
is, by Divine assistance.' f

Bannez proposes the thesis in these words : ' Can
(the Roman Pontiff) err in denning matters of
faith? 'J

S. Antoninus says, ' It is necessary to admit one
head in the Church, to whom it belongs to clear up

* * In his qua3 ad fidem pertinent.'1 i Pontifex Romanus non potest
errare in fide? * Non solum in decretis fidei en-are non potest
Summus Pontifex, sed neque in praeceptis morum, quse toti Ecclesia}
prasscribuntur, et quae in rebus necessariis ad salutem, vel in iis
quae per se bona vel mala sunt, versantur.' — Bellarmine, De Romano
Pontifice, lib. iv. capp. iii. v. pp. 795, 804. Venice, 1599.

•f l Absque ulla restrictione dicendum est, quicquid Pontifex in
rebus controversis a d pietatem spectantibus determinat, infallibiliter
ilium determinare, quando, ut expositum est, universam Ecclesiam
obligat.' Greg, de Valentia, Opp. torn. iii. disp. i. qu. i. * De
Objecto Fidei,' punct. vii. s. 40, p. 312. Ingolstadt, 1595.

1 Qusecumque Pontifex in aliqua re de religione controversa sic
asserit, certa fide credendum est ilium infallibiliter, utpote ex auc-
toritate Pontificia, i.e. ex Divina assistentia, asserere.' — Ibid. s. 39,
p. 303.

t 'An possit in rebus fidei definieudis errare? ' — In Sum. S. Th.
Q. 2. q. 1. art. 10.

62 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

doubts concerning whatsoever relates to faith, whether
speculative or practical.' *

Suarez says, ' It is a Catholic truth, that the Pon-
tiff defining ex cathedra is a rule of faith which can-
not err, whensoever he proposes authoritatively any-
thing to be believed of faith to the whole Church.' f

And in his treatise 4De Religione,' tract, ix. 1. 3,
c. 4, n. 5, speaking of the Bull of Gregory XIII.,
4 Ascendente Domino,' by which it is declared that
simple vows constitute a true religious state, he says
that the truth of this definition is ' altogether infallible,
so that it cannot be denied without error. The
reason is, because the sentence of the Pontiff in
things which pertain to doctrine contains infallible
certainty by the institution and promise of Christ,
" I have prayed for thee." : Afterwards he adds, ' The
providence of Christ our Lord over His Church
would be greatly diminished if He should permit His
Vicar, in deciding such questions ex cathedra, to fall
into error.' J

* ' Oportet enim in Ecclesia ponere unum caput, ad quod pertinet
declarare ilia quae sunt dubia circa quaecumque ad fidem pertinentia>
sive sint speculativa sive agibilia.' — Summa Theol. p. iii. tit. 22,
c. 3.

f ' Veritas Catholica est Pontificem definientem ex cathedra esse
regulam fidei, quse errare non potest quando aliquid auth entice pro-
ponit toti Ecclesise, tanquam de fide credendum.' — Suarez, De
Fide, disp. v. sec. 8, torn. xiii. p. 94. Mentz, 1622.

J ' Omnino infallibilem, itaut sine errore in fide negari non possit.
Ratio est, quia sententia Pontificis in his quce ad doctrinam pertinent,
infallibilem continet certitudinem ex Christi institution e et permis-
sione : " Ego rogavi pro te." . . . Valde auteni diminuta fuisset
Christi Domini providentia circa suam Ecclesiam si in decidendis
talibus quasstionibus ex cathedra Vicarium suum labi permitteret.' —
Id. De Reliyione Soc, Jesu, lib. iii. c. 4, n. 5, torn. xvii. p. 427.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 63

Melchior Can us says, ' The Roman Pontiff succeeds
by Divine right to Peter both in firmness of faith
and in deciding controversies of religion ;' and again,
' The Roman Pontiff in ending controversies of faith
cannot err.' *

S. Alphonsus affirms, c When the Pope speaks as
universal Doctor, ex cathedra, that is, by the supreme
authority to teach the Church, delivered to Peter,
in deciding controversies of faith and morals, he is
altogether infallible.' f

Hervseus says, ' The authority of declaring doubtful
points in such matters belongs to the Pope, that is, in
things pertaining to the natural or divine law ; ' and
afterwards he adds, ' That his declaration ought to
be held as true, so that it is not lawful to hold or
to opine the contrary. 'J

Gregory de Valentia adds, ' In him, whom the
whole Church is bound to obey in those things which
pertain to the spiritual health of the soul, whether they
concern faith or morals, there is infallible authority
for the judging questions of faith.' Again : c Christ
willed that after the death of Peter, some one should

* ' Romanus Pontifex Petro et in fidei firmitate et in compo-
nendis religionis controversies divino jure succedit. Romanus Pon-
tifex in fidei controversiis finiendis errare non potest.' — Melchior
Canus, De loc. Tkeol. lib. vi. c. 4 and 7.

t ' Quum Papa loquitur tanquam Doctor universalis ex cathedra,
nempe ex potestate suprema tradita Petro docendi Ecclesiam in
controversiis fidei et morum decernendis, est omnino infallibilis. — S.
Alphons. Lig. Opp. torn. i. lib. i. tract. 2, p. 135. Mechlin, 1845.

J < Ad Papam pertinet auctoritas declarandi dubia in talibus, hoc
est, in pertinentibus ad jus naturale vd divinumj &c. — De Pot.
Papcc, ii. col. 4. . . . ' Quod declaratio sua debeat haberi ut vera,
ita quod non liceat oppositum tenere vel opinari."1 — De Potest. Papali,
apud S. Anton. Roccab. BiU. Pontif. torn. v. p. G6.

Gi THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

be acknowledged by the Church in perpetual succession
in Peter's place : on whom Christ Himself should con-
fer supreme authority as He did on Peter, of ordaining
the matters which relate to faith, and to other things
pertaining to the salvation of the faithful? And fur-
ther he says, 'that He (Christ) may confer on him
the authority, which Peter had, that is, that by a
certain law he may so ordain as to co-operate with
him by a peculiar assistance, in rightly appointing
such things in doctrine and morals as pertain to the
good estate of the Church?

And still more explicitly in another place he says,
4 It is not to be denied, that what has been said of the
infallible certainty of the Pontifical definitions, holds
good, first, in those things which the Pontiff has pro-
posed to the faithful, in deciding doctrinal controversies
and exterminating errors, as revealed of God, and to be
believed by faith. But, forasmuch as the Church is
always bound to hear its Pastor, and the Divine Scrip-
ture declares absolutely the Church to be the pillar and
ground of the truth (1 Tim. iii.), and therefore it can-
not ever err as a whole, it cannot be doubtful, that
the authority of the Pontiff is infallible in all other
things which regard piety, and the whole Church. Nor
do I think that this can be denied without error.'
Gregory then applies this to the canonisation of
Saints, and concludes : 4 This certainty surely rests
upon the same promises of God, by which we have
seen that it can never be that the whole Church
should err in matters of religion?*

* i Cui Ecclesia tota obtemperare tenetur, in iis rebus, quo2 ad
spiritualem animce salutem pertinent^ sive illae fidem sive mores con-

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 65

Here we have the single word faith put to stand
for the whole revealed order of salvation : for morals
are contained under faith ; and this, which is the ulti-
mate object of infallibility, is expressed in the following
and various formulas: 1. Concerning faith. 2. In
things of faith and morals. 3. Things which pertain
to faith. 4. Things necessary to salvation. 5. Pre-
cepts of morals binding the whole Church. 6. Things
pertaining to piety. 7. Things of religion. 8.
Things of faith speculative and practical. 9. Things
pertaining to doctrine. 10. Controversies of religion.

11. Things pertaining to the natural and Divine laws.

12. Things pertaining to the spiritual health of souls.

cernant, in eo auctoritas est infallibilis ad fidei qusestiones dijudi-
candas.' — Gregory de Valentia, disp. 1. q. 1, ' De Objecto Fidei,' p.
vii. q. 5. s. 27, p. 238. Ingoldstadt, 1595.

1 Voluit Christus ut Petro vita defuncto aliquis perpetua serie
successionis in locum Petri ab Ecclesia reciperetur, cui Christus ipse
auctoritatem supremam sicut Petro conferret, de fide et aliis rebus
ea constituendi quas ad salutem fidelium pertineant.1 Ibid s. 35,
p. 275. . . ' Ut is [Christus] illi conferat auctoritatem quam Petrus
habuit, hoc est, ut certa lege statuat, peculiari quadam assistentia
cum eo concurrere ad ea in doctrina et moribus recte constituenda
quse ad bonum Ecclesice statum pertineant. ^ — Ibid. s. 36, p. 279.

*Non estnegandum, quin quod dictum est de infallibili certitudine
definitionum Pontificis, imprimis locum habeat, in iis quse Pontifex
ad doctrines controversias finiendas erroresque exterminandos fidelium
proposuit, tanquam a Deo revelata et credenda ex fide. Casterum,
quoniam Pastorem suum semper audire tenetur Ecclesia, et Ecclesiam
divina Scriptura absolute praadicat esse columnam et firmamentum
veritatis (1 Tim. iii.), ideoque nunquam errare tota potest ; dubium
esse non debet, quin in aliis quoque rebus omnibus asserendis,
quce ad pietatem spectent, et Ecclesiam totam concernent, in-
fallibilis sit Pontificis auctoritas. Neque sane arbitror, hoc absque
errore negari posse. . . Quas sane certitudo iisdem illis Dei promis-
sionibus nititur ex quibus compertum habemus nunquam esse
futurum ut universa Ecclesia in rebus religionis fallatur.' — Ibid. s.
40, p. 306.

66 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

13. And to the salvation of the faithful. 14. To the
good estate of the Church. 15. The deciding of con-
troversies and the extermination of errors. 16.
Things which regard piety and the whole Church.
17. Matters of religion.

These might be greatly multiplied. They will,
however, suffice to show how wide and general is the
simple formula ' in faith and morals/ which is the
traditionary expression of the object of the infallibility
of the Church.

It is clear that these phrases are all equivalent.
They are more or less explicit, but they contain the
same ultimate meaning, namely, that the Church
has an infallible guidance in treating of all matters
of faith, morals, piety, and the general good of the
Church.

The object of infallibility, then, is the whole re-
vealed Word of God, and all that is so in contact
with revealed truth> that without treating of it, the
Word of God could not be guarded, expounded, and
defended. As, for instance, in declaring the Canon
and authenticity and true interpretation of Holy
Scripture, and the like.

Further, it is clear that the Church has an infallible
guidance, not only in all matters that are revealed,
but also in all matters which are opposed to reve-
lation. For the Church could not discharge its office
as the Teacher of all nations, unless it were able with
infallible certainty to proscribe doctrines at variance
with the word of God.

From this^ again, it follows that the direct object of
infallibility is the Revelation, or Word, of God; the
indirect object is whatsoever is necessary for its expo-

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 67

sitiorror defence, and whatsoever is contrarian t to the
Word of God, that is, to faith and morals. The Church
having a divine office to condemn errors in faith and
morals, has therefore an infallible assistance in dis-
cerning and in proscribing false philosophies and false
science.* Under this head comes the condemnation
of heretical texts, such as the Three Chapters,
proscribed in the Fifth Council, the 'Augustinus'
of Jansenius, and the like ; and also censures, both
greater and less, those, for instance, of heresy and
of error, because of their contrariety to faith; those
also of temerity, scandal, and the like, because of
their contrariety to morals at least.

2. It is therefore evident that the doctrinal autho-
rity of the Church is not confined to matters of revela-
tion, but extends also to positive truths which are not
revealed, whensoever the doctrinal authority of the
Church cannot be duly exercised in the promulga-
tion, explanation, and defence of revelation without
judging and pronouncing on such matters and truths.
This will be clear from the following propositions :

( 1 . ) First, the doctrinal authority of the Church is
infallible in all matters and truths which are neces-
sary to the custody of the Depositum.

This extends to certain truths of natural science,
as, for example, the existence of substance ; and to
truths of the natural reason, such as that the soul is

* Porro Ecclesia, quas una cum apostolico munere docendi, man-
datum accepit fidei depositum custodiendi, jus etiam et officium
divinitus habet falsi nominis scientiam proscribendi, ne quis deci-
piatur per philosophiam, et inanem fallaciam (Coloss. ii. 8). — Con-
stitutio Prima de Fide Catholica, cap. iv. De Fide et Ratione.
Appendix, No. IV.

68 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

immaterial ; that it is c the form of the body ; ' *
and the like. It extends also to certain truths of the
supernatural order, which are not revealed; as, the
authenticity of certain texts or versions of the Holy
Scriptures.

The Council of Trent by a dogmatic decree declared,
under anathema, that the Vulgate edition is authentic.
Now this is a definition or dogmatic judgment, to be
believed on the infallible authority of the Church.
But this truth or fact is not revealed.

(2.) Secondly, there are truths of mere human his-
tory, which therefore are not revealed, without which
the deposit of the Faith cannot be taught or guarded in
its integrity. For instance, that St. Peter was Bishop
of Rome ; that the Council of Trent and the Council
of the Vatican are (Ecumenical, that is, legitimately
celebrated arid confirmed ; that Pius IX. is the
successor of Peter by legitimate election. These
truths are not revealed. They have no place in Scrip-
ture ; and except the first, they have no place in
tradition ; yet they are so necessary to the order of
faith, that the whole would be undermined if they
were not infallibly certain. But such infallible cer-
tainty is impossible by means of human history and
human evidence alone. It is created only by the in-
fallible authority of the Church.

(3.) Thirdly, there are truths of interpretation, not
revealed, without which the deposit of the faith can-
not be preserved.

The Council of Trent f declares that to the Church
it belongs to judge of the true sense and inter-

* Coucil. Later. V. Bulla Apostolici Regiminis. f Sess. iv.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 69

pretation of Holy Scripture. Now the sense of the
Holy Scripture is twofold ; namely, the literal and
grammatical, or, as it is called, the sensus quis] and
the theological and doctrinal, or the sensus quails.
The Church judges infallibly of both. It judges of
the question that such and such words or texts have
such and such literal and grammatical meaning. It
judges also of the conformity of such meaning with
the rule of faith, or of its contradiction to the same.
The former is a question of fact, the latter of dogma.
That the latter falls within the infallible judgment of
the Church has been denied by none but heretics.
The former has been denied, for a time, by some who
continued to be Catholics : for this is, in truth, the
question of dogmatic facts. But the Jansenists never
ventured to extend their denial to the text of Scrip-
ture, though the argument is one and the same. The
Church has the same assistance in judging of the
grammatical and of the theological sense of texts,
whether sacred or simply human : and has exercised
it in all ages.

For instance : Pope Hormisdas * says, ' The vener-
able wisdom of the Fathers providently defined by
faithful ordinance what doctrines are Catholic : fixing
also certain parts of the ancient books to be received
as of authority, the Holy Ghost so instructing them;
lest the reader, indulging his own opinion . . . should
assert not that which tends, to the edification of the
Church, but what his own pleasure had conceived.'

Pope Nicholas I. f writes, 4By their decree (i.e. that

* Hormisdae Ep. LXX. Labbe, Condi, torn. v. p. 664.

j Nic. Ep. ad Univ. Episc. Galliae, Labbe, Condi, torn. x. p. 282.

70 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

of tlie Roman Pontiffs) the writings of other authors
are approved or condemned, so that what the Apo-
stolic See approves, is to be held at this day, and what
it has rejected, is to be esteemed of no effect/ &c.

Pope Gelasius, in a Council held at Rome, decreed
as follows : £ Also the writings of CaBcilius Cyprianus.
Martyr, Bishop of Carthage, are in all things to be
received; also the writings of Blessed Gregory, Bishop
of Nazianzum. . . . also the writings and treatises of
all orthodox Fathers, who in nothing have deviated
from the fellowship of the Holy Roman Church, nor
have been separated from its faith and preaching;
but have been partakers by the grace of God of its
communion unto the last day of their life, we decree
to be read.' *

Turrecremata says, ' It is to be believed that the
Roman Pontiff is directed by the Holy Ghost in things
of faith, and consequently in these cannot err ; other-
wise any one might as easily say that there was error
in the choice (or discernment) of the four Gospels,
and of the canonical epistles, and of the books of
other doctors, approving some, and disapproving
others ; which, however, we read, and as is evident,
was determined by the Roman Pontiffs Gregory and
Gelasius. 'f Again, he says, ; The sixth kind of Catho-
lic truths are those which are asserted by doctors,
approved by the Universal Church for the defence of
the faith and the confutation of heretics. . . . This
is evident : for since the Church, which is directed by

* Labbe, Condi, torn. v. p. 387.

•f Turrecremata, De potestate Papali, lib. ii. cap. 112, in Bibl.
M. Rocaberti, torn. xiii. p. 453.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 71

the Holy Ghost, approves certain doctors, receiving
their doctrine as true, it necessarily follows that the
doctrine of such (writers), delivered by way of asser-
tion, and never otherwise retracted, is true and ought
to be held by all the faithful with firm belief, in so
far as it is received by the Universal Church; other-
wise, the Universal Church would appear to have
erred in approving and accepting their doctrine as
true, which however was not true.'*

And Stapleton lays down, c Bishops . . . when
they treat of the Scripture as doctors, have not this
certain and infallible authority of which we are speak-
ing : until their treatises, approved by sacred authority,
are commended by the Church as Catholic and cer-
tainly orthodox interpretation, which Gelasius first
did,'f &c.

I will give one more example, as it is eminently in
point.

The Church has approved in a special manner the
works of St. Augustine as containing the true doc-
trines of grace against the Pelagian and semi-Pelagian
heresies.

In this particular, his works have been declared to
be orthodox by St. Innocent I., St. Zosimus, St.
Boniface I., St. Celestine, St. Hormisdas, St. Felix IV.,
and Boniface II. For that reason Clement XI. justly
condemned the book of Launoy called 'Veritable
tradition de 1'Eglise sur la Predestination et la Grace/
&c., as 4 at least impious and blasphemous, and in-
jurious to St. Augustine, the shining light and chief

* Ibid. lib. iv. p. ii. c. ii. 382.

t Controv. Field, lib. x. c. ii. p. 355, ed. Paris, 1620.

72 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

doctor of the Catholic Church ; as also to the Church
itself and to the Apostolic See.' *

Now, in this approbation the Church approved the
doctrine of St. Augustine, not only in the sensus
quails but also in the sensus quis ; that is, it approved
not only a possible theological sense which was or-
thodox, but the very and grammatical sense of the
text. It was therefore a true doctrinal judgment
as to a dogmatic fact.

For, as Cardinal Gerdil argues, the doctrine of St.
Augustine was proposed by the Church as a rule of
faith against the Pelagian and semi- Pelagian errors.
' When it is said that the doctrine of St. Augustine in
the matter of grace was adopted by the Church, it
must not be understood in the sense as if St. Augus-
tine had worked out a peculiar system for himself,

which the Church then adopted as its own

c The great merit of St. Augustine is, that with mar-
vellous learning he expounded and defended the
antient belief of the faithful.' f The Church infal-
libly discerned the orthodoxy of his writings, and
approving them, commended them as a rule of faith.

If the Church have this infallible discernment of
the meaning, grammatical and theological, of orthodox
texts, it has eodem intuitu the same discernment of
heterodox texts. For the universal practice of the
Church in commending the writings of orthodox, and
of condemning those 01 heterodox authors, is a part
of the doctrinal authority of the Church in the

* Brev. < Cum. sicut,' 28 Jan. 1704. D'Argentre, Collec. Jud. torn,
vi. p. 444.

f Saggio d* Jstruz. teol. i De gratia,' ed. Rom. p. 189.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 73

custody and defence of the faith. It falls therefore
within the limits of its infallibility.

The commendation of the works of St. Augustine,
and the condemnation of the Thalia of Arius at Mcaea,
of the Anathematisms of Nestorius at Ephesus, and of
the Three Chapters of Ibas, Theodore, and Theodoret,
in the Second Council of Constantinople, all alike in-
volved a judgment of dogmatic facts.

The subterfuge of the Jansenists as to the literal
meaning of c Augustinus ' came too late. The practice
of the Church and the decrees of Councils had already
pronounced its condemnation.

(4.) What has here been said of the condemnation
of heretical texts, is equally applicable to the censures
of the Church.

The condemnation of propositions is only the con-
demnation of a text by fragments.

The same discernment which ascertains the ortho-
doxy of certain propositions, detects the heterodoxy
of those which are contradictory. And in both pro-
cesses that discernment is infallible. To define
doctrines of faith, and to condemn the contradictions
of heresy, is almost one and the same act. The
infallibility of the Church in condemning heretical
propositions is denied by no Catholic.

In like manner, the detection and condemnation of
propositions at variance with theological certainty is
a function of the same discernment by which theo-
logical certainty is known. But the Church has an
infallible discernment of truths which are theologically
certain; that is, of conclusions resulting from two
premisses of which one is revealed and the other
evident bv the light of nature.

74 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

In these two kinds of censures, at least, it is there-
fore of faith that the Church is infallible.

As to the other censures, such as temerity, scandal,
offence to pious ears, and the like, it is evident that
they all relate to the moral character of propositions.
It is not credible that a proposition condemned by
the Church as rash should not be rash, and as scan-
dalous should not be scandalous, or as offensive to pious
ears should not be such, and the like. If the Church
be infallible in faith and morals, it is not to be be-
lieved that it can err in passing these moral judgments
on the ethical character of propositions. In truth,
all Catholic theologians, without exception, so far
as I know, teach that the Church is infallible in all
such censures.* They differ only in this: that some
declare this truth to be of faith, and therefore the
denial of it to be heresy ; others declare it to be of
faith as to the condemnation of heretical propositions,
but in all others to be only of theological certainty ;
so that the denial of it to be not heresy, but error.

To deny the infallibility of the Church in the
censures less than for heresy, is held to be heretical
by De Panormo, Malderus, Coninck, Diana, Oviedo,
Amici, Matteucci, Pozzobonelli, Viva, Nannetti.
Murray calls it objective heresy. Griffini, Herincx,
Kipalda, Ferraris, and Reinerding do not decide
whether it be heretical, erroneous, or proximate to
error. Cardenas and Turrianus hold it to be
erroneous ; Anfossi erroneous, or proximate to error.
De Lugo in one place maintains that it is erroneous ;

* Of course, I am not speaking of writers whose works are under
censure.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 75

in another, that to deny the infallibility of the Church
in the condemnation of erroneous propositions, is
heresy.* All, therefore, affirm the Church in passing
such censures to be infallible.

The infallibility of the Church in all censures less
than heresy may be proved from the acts of the
Council of Constance. In the eleventh article of the
Interrogatory proposed to the followers of Huss are
included condemnations of all kinds. They were
asked whether they believed the articles of Wickliffe
and Huss to be 'not Catholic, but some of them
notoriously heretical, some erroneous, others temera-
rious and seditious, others offensive to pious ears.'f

* De Panormo, Scrutinium Doctrinarum, cap. iii. art. xiii. num.
7 sqq. p. 196, Home, 1709; Diana, Opp. torn. ix. De infall. Eom.
Pont, resol. x. num. 8 sqq. p. 262, Venice, 1698; Amici, Cursus
Theologicus, torn. iv. De Fide, disp. vii. num. 55, p. 146, Douay,
1641 ; Matteucci, Opus Dogmatic. De Controv. Fidei, vii. cap. iii.
num. 33, p. 359, Venice, 17o5 ; Viva, Theses Damnatce, quasst.
prodrom. num. xviii. p. 10, Padua, 1737; Murray, De Ecclesia,
torn. iii. fasc. i. p. 226, Dublin, 1865; Herincx, Summ. Theol. Sclwl.
et Moral, dub. ix. num. 98, p. 186, Antwerp, 1663; Ripalda, torn,
iii. disp. i. sect. 7, num. 59, p. 16, Cologne, 1648 ; Ferraris, Biblio-
thec. "Canonic, torn. vi. sub. v. Prop, Damn. num. 37, p. 565, Rome,
1789; Eeinerding, Theol. Fundamental, tract, i. num. 408, p. 237,
Minister, 1864 ; Cardenas, Crisis Theologica, dis. procem. num. 140,
p. 35, Cologne, 1690; Turrianus, Select. Disput. Theol. pars i.
disp. xxx. dub. 3, p. 149, Lyons, 1634; Anfossi, Difesa deW lAucto-
rem Fidei,' lett. x. torn. ii. p. 141, Rome, 1816; De Lugo, De Virtute
Fidei, torn. iii. disp. xx. sect. 3, num. 109, p. 324, and num. 113-
117, p. 325, Venice, 1751. For the summary and for the references
to Pozzobonelli, Malderus, Coninck, Oviedo, Nannetti and Griffini,
I am indebted to an unpublished work of Fr. Granniello of the
congregation of Barnabites in Rome.

f ' Utrum credat sententiam sacri Constantiensis concilii,
. . . scilicet quod supradicti 45 articuli Joannis Wicliff, et
Joannis Huss triginta, non sunt Catholici ; sed quidam ex eis sunt

76 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Martin V., therefore, in the Bull 'Inter cunctos*
requires belief, that is, interior assent, to all such con-
demnations made by the Council of Constance, which
therein extended its infallible jurisdiction to all the
minor censures, less than that of heresy.

In like manner, again, in the Bull 4 Auctorem Fidei/
the propositions condemned as heretical are very
few, but the propositions condemned as erroneous,
scandalous, offensive, schismatical, injurious, are very
numerous.

During the last three hundred years, the Pontiffs
have condemned a multitude of propositions of which
perhaps not twenty were censured with the note of
heresy.

Now in every censure the Church proposes to us
some truth relating to faith or morals ; and whether
the matter of such truths be revealed or not revealed,
it nevertheless so pertains to faith and morals that
the deposit could not be guarded if the Church in
such judgments were liable to error.

The Apostle declares that ' the Church is the pillar
and ground of the Truth/ * On what authority these
words can be restricted to reve.aled truths alone, I do
not know. I know of no commentator, ancient or
modern, who so restricts them. On the other hand
St. Peter Damian, Sixtus V., Ferre, Cardinal de
Lugo, Gregory de Valentia, expressly extend these
words to all truths necessary to the custody of the
deposit.

notorie hseretici, quidam erronei, alii temerarii et seditiosi, alii
piarura aurium offensivi.' — Labbe, Concil. torn. xvi. p. 194.
* 1 Tim. iii. 15.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 77

This doctrine is abundantly confirmed by the
following declarations of Pius IX. c For the Church
by its Divine institution is bound with all diligence to
guard whole and inviolate the deposit of Divine faith,
and constantly to watch with supreme zeal over the
salvation of souls, driving away therefore, and elimi-
nating with all exactness, all things which are either
contrary to faith or can in any way bring into peril
the salvation of souls. Wherefore the Church, by
the power committed to it by its Divine Author, has
not only the right, but above all the duty, of not
tolerating but of proscribing and of condemning all
errors, if the integrity of the faith and the salvation
of souls should so require. On all philosophers
who desire to remain sons of the Church, and on
all philosophy, this duty lies, to assert nothing con-
trary to the teaching of the Church, and to retract
all such things when the Church shall so admonish.
The opinion which teaches contrary to this we pro-
nounce and declare altogether erroneous, and in the
highest degree injurious to the faith of the Church,
and to its authority.'*

From all that has been said, it is evident that the
Church claims no jurisdiction over the processes of
philosophy or science, except as they bear upon re-
vealed truths ; nor does it claim to intervene in
philosophy or science as a judge or censor of the
principles proper to such philosophy or science. The
only judgment it pronounces regards the conformity
or variance of such processes of the human intelli-

* Litteras Pii IX., ' Gravissimas inter,' ad Archiep. Monac. et

Prising. Dec. -1862.

78 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

gence with the deposit of faith, and the principles of
revealed morality : that is, in order to the end of its
infallible office, namely, the guardianship of Divine
revelation.

I will not here attempt to enumerate the subject-
matters which fall within the limits of the infalli-
bility of the Church. It belongs to the Church alone to
determine the limits of its own infallibility. Hitherto
it has not done so except by its acts, and from the
practice of the Church we may infer to what matter
its infallible discernment extends. It is enough for
the present to show two things :

1. First, that the infallibility of the Church ex-
tends, as we have seen, directly to the whole matter
of revealed truth, and indirectly to all truths which
though not revealed are in such contact with revela-
tion that the deposit of faith and morals cannot be
guarded, expounded, and defended without an infal-
lible discernment of such unrevealed truths.

2. Secondly, that this extension of the infallibility
of the Church is, by the unanimous teaching of all
theologians, at least theologically certain ; and, in the
judgment of the majority of theologians, certain by
the certainty of faith.

Such is the traditional doctrine respecting the
infallibility of the Church in faith and morals. By
the definition of the Vatican Council, what is tra-
ditionally believed by all the faithful in respect to the
Church is expressly declared of the Koman Pontiff.
But the definition of the extent of that infal-
libility, and of the certainty on which it rests, in
matters not revealed, has not been treated as yet,

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 79

but is left for the second part of the 'Schema De
Ecclesia.'

III. Thirdly, the definition declares the efficient
cause of infallibility to be a Divine assistance pro-
mised to Peter, and in Peter to his successors.

The explicit promise is that of our Divine Lord
to Peter, ' I have prayed for thee that thy faith
fail not, and thou being once converted, confirm thy
brethren.' *

The implicit promise is in the words ' On this rock
I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall
not prevail against it.' f

The traditional interpretation of these promises is
precise.

The words, ' Ego rogavi pro te, ut non deficiat fides
tua, et tu aliquando con versus confirma fratres tuos/
are interpreted, by both Fathers and Councils, of the
perpetual stability of Peter's faith in his see and his
successors ; and of this assertion I give the following
proofs.

St. Ambrose, A.D. 397, in his treatise on Faith,
says, Christ ' said to Peter, I have prayed for thee,
that thy faith fail not. Was He not therefore able
to confirm the faith of him to whom by His own
authority He gave the kingdom? whom He pointed
out as the foundation of the Church, when He called
him the rock ? ' J

* St. Luke, xxii. 32,

j St. Matth. xvi. 18.

J Habes in evangelic quia Petro ctixit, Rogavi pro te nt non
deficiat fides tua. — Ergo cui propria auctoritate regnum dabat, hujus
fidem firmare non poterat; quern cum petram dixit firmamentum
Ecclesiae indicavit ? — St. Ambrose De Fide, lib. iv. cap. v. torn. iii-.
p. 672, ed. Ben. Venice, 1751.

80 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

St. John Chrysostom, A.D. 407, in his commentary
on the Acts of the Apostles, writes, c He (i.e. Peter)
takes the lead in the matter, as he was himself en-
trusted with the care of all. For Christ said to him,
Thou, being converted, confirm thy brethren.'*

St. Augustine, A.D. 430, in his commentary on the
words of Psalm cxviii. 43, i And take not Thou the
word of truth utterly out of my mouth,' says, 4 There-
fore the whole body of Christ speaks ; that is, the
universality of the Holy Church. And the Lord
Himself said to Peter, I have prayed for thee, that
thy faith fail not, that is, that the word of truth be
not utterly taken out of thy mouth. 'f

St. Cyril of Alexandria, A.D. 444, in his commen-
tary on St. Luke, says, ' The Lord, when He hinted at
the denial of His disciple and said, I have prayed for
thee, that thy faith fail not, immediately utters a
word of consolation, thou being converted, confirm
thy brethren; that is, be the confirmer and teacher
of those who come to Me by faith.' J

* Hp&TOQ TOV Trpa-y/JLarog avdei'Tel, are avroc iravTag iyxeipiafte'tQ,
TrpoQ yap TOVTOV elirev 6 Xpioroe* Kat ffv 7TOT£ tTriflTpe'^/af ffrrjpi^ov
roug dtteA^ovg <™v. — St. Joann. Chrys. Opp. torn. ix. p. 26, ed.
Ben. Paris, 1731.

f Totum itaque corpus Christ! loquitur, id est Ecclesise sanctae
universitas. — Et ipse Dominus ad Petrum, Eogavi, inquit, pro te, ne
deficiat fides tua ; hoc est ne auferatur ex ore tuo verbum veritatis
usque valde. — St. Augustin. Enarratio in Psalmos, torn. iv. p. 1310,
ed. Ben. Paris, 1681.

^ 'O ptt-TOi KvpioQ Tt]v TOV padrjrov apvrjmv ani^ufjiEVOQ iv cut; %>'?,
i$e{tdriv Trepl <TOV 'iva prj fc*:Xt7rp >j TT'KJTLQ <rov, tiafyf'pei Trapa^prjfja
TOI' TYIQ 7rctpa.K\r]ae cog Aoyov, KQI 0ry<rt, Kat av TTOTS ifriffTpf v//ag arr\oi^,or
TOVQ a$£\(f>ovc; auv ' TovrtffTt ytvov orifpcyjEia Kai SidaaKaXog TWV diet
TTtffTEWQ Trpomovruv ep.oi. — St. Cyrill. Alex. Comment, in Luc. xxii.
torn. v. p. 916, ed. Migne, Paris, 1848.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 81

St. Leo the Great, A.D. 460, in a discourse on the
anniversary of his election to the Pontificate, says, ' If
anything in our time and by us is well administered
and rightly ordained, it is to be ascribed to his opera-
tion and to his government, to whom it was said,
" Thou being converted, confirm thy brethren," and
to whom after His resurrection, in answer to his
threefold declaration of everlasting love, the Lord with
mystical meaning thrice said, " Feed my sheep." '*

St. Gelasius, A.D. 496, writes to Honorius, Bishop
of Dalmatia, i Though we are hardly able to draw
breath in the manifold difficulties of the times ; yet
in the government of the Apostolic See we un-
ceasingly have in hand the care of the whole fold of
the Lord, which was committed to blessed Peter by
the voice of our Saviour Himself, " And thou being
converted, confirm thy brethren," and again, " Peter,
lovest thou Me? Feed My sheep." 'f

Pelagius II., A.D. 590, in like manner writes to the
Bishops of Istria, 4 For you know how the Lord in
the gospel declares : Simon, Simon, behold Satan has
desired you that he might sift you as wheat, but I

* Tantam potentiam dedit ei quern totius Ecclesiae principem
fecit, ut si quid etiam nostris temporibus recte per nos agitur
recteque disponitur illius operibus illius sit gubernaculis deputandum,
cui dictum est, Et tu conversus confirma fratres tuos ; et cui post
resurrectionem suam Dominus ad trinain aeterni amorisprofessionera
mystica insinuatione ter dixit, Pasce oves meas. — St. Leo, serm. iv.
cap. iv. torn. i. p. 19, ed. Ballerini, Venice, 1753.

| Licet inter varias temporum difficultates vix respirare valeamus,
pro sedis tamen apostolicae moderamine totius ovilis dominici curam
sine cessatione tractantes, qua? beato Petro salvatoris ipsius nostri
voce delegata est, Et tu conversus confirma fratres tuos ; et item,
Petre, amas me ? pasce oves meas. — St. Gelasius, epist. v. ; in Labbe,
Condi, torn. v. p. 298, Venice, 1728.

82 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

have prayed the Father for thee, that thy faith fail
not, arid thou being converted, confirm thy brethren.
See, beloved, the truth cannot be falsified, nor can
the faith of Peter ever be shaken or changed.'*

St. Gregory the Great, A.D. 604, in his celebrated
letter to Maurice, Emperor of the East, says, ' For it
is clear to all who know the Gospel, that the care of
the whole Church was committed to the Apostle
St. Peter, prince of all the Apostles. For to him it
is said, u Peter, lovest thou Me? Feed My sheep." To
him it is said, u Behold, Satan has desired to sift you
as wheat : but I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy
faith fail not, and thou being once converted, confirm
thy brethren." To him it is said, " Thou art Peter,
and upon this rock I will build My church," 'f &c.

Stephen, Bishop of Dori, A.D. 649, at a Lateran
Council under Martin I. says, in a libellus supplex or
memorial read and recorded in the acts, 4 Peter the
Prince of the Apostles was first commanded to feed
the sheep of the Catholic Church, when the Lord
said, " Peter, lovest thou Me ? Feed My sheep." And

* Nostis enim in evangelic dominum proclamantem, Simon,
Simon, ecce Satanas expetivit vos, ut cribraret sicut triticum, ego
autem rogavi pro te Patrem, ut non deficiat fides tua, et tu conversus
confirma fratres tuos. Considerate, carissimi, quia veritas mentiri
non potuit, nee fides Petri in sternum quassari poterit vel mutari.
— Pelagius. II. epist. v. in Labbe, Condi, torn. vi. p. 626.

j" Cunctis enim Evangelium scientibus liquet, quod voce dominica
sancto et omnium apostolorum Petro Principi Apostolo totius
Ecclesiae cura commissa est. Ipsi quippe dicitur, Petre, amas me ?
pasce oves meas. Ipsi dicitur, Ecce Satanas expetiit cribrare vos
sicut triticum ; et ego pro te rogavi, Petre, ut non deficiat fides tua ;
et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres tuos. Ipsi dicitur, Tu es
Petrus et super hanc petram, etc. — St. Gregor. Epist. lib. v. ep. xx.
torn. ii. 748, ed. Ben. Paris, 1705.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 83

again, he chiefly and especially, having a faith firm
above all, and unchangeable in our Lord God, was
found worthy to convert and to confirm his fellows
and his spiritual brethren who were shaken.'*

Pope St. Yitalian, A.D. 669, says, in a letter to
Paul, Archbishop of Crete, c What things we com-
mand thee and thy Synod according to God and for
the Lord, study at once to fulfil, lest we be compelled
to bear ourselves not in mercy but according to the
power of the sacred canons, for it is written : The
Lord said, " Peter, I have prayed for thee, that thy
faith fail not, and thou being once converted, con-
firm thy brethren." And again : " Whatsoever thou,
Peter, shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven,
and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed
in heaven.'" f

The quotations given in the Pastoral Letter of last
year, united with these, afford the following result.
The application of the promise Ego rogavi pro te, &c.
to the infallible faith of Peter and his successors, is
made by St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Leo, St.
Gelasius, Pelagius II., St. Gregory the Great,

* Princeps apostolorum Petrus pascere primus jussus est oves
Catholicse Ecclesise, cum Dominus dicit, Petre, arnas me ? Pasce
oves meas; et iteruni ipse preecipue ac specialiter firmam pras omni-
bus habens in Dominum Deum nostrum et immutabilem fidem,
convertere aliquando et confirmare exagitatos consortes suos et
spiritales meruit fratres. — Labbe, Concil.tom. vii. p. 107.

•j" Quse pra?cipimus tibi secundum Deum et propter Dominum
tuaque synodo, stude illico peragere, ne cogamur non misericorditer
sed secundum virtutem sacratissimorum canonum conversari.
Scriptum namque est, Dorninus inquit, Petre, rogavi pro te ut
non deficeret fides tua ; et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres
tuos. Et rursum, Quodcunque ligaveris, etc. — St. Vitalian, epist. i.
in Labbe, Condi, torn. vii. p. 460.

84 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Stephen Bishop of Dori in a Lateran Council, St.
Vitalian, the Bishops of the IV. (Ecumenical Council
A.D. 451, St. Agatho in the VI. A.D. 680, St. Bernard
A.D. 1153, St. Thomas Aquinas A.D. 1274, St. Bona-
venture A.D. 1274: that is, this interpretation is given
by three out of the four doctors of the Church, by six
Pontiffs down to the seventh century. It was
recognised in two (Ecumenical Councils. It is ex-
plicitly declared by the Angelic Doctor, who may be
taken as the exponent of the Dominican school, and
by the Seraphic Doctor, who is likewise the witness of
the Franciscan ; and by a multitude of Saints. This
catena, if continued to later times, might, as all know,
be indefinitely prolonged.

The interpretation by the Fathers of the words
i On this rock/ &c. is fourfold, but all four interpre-
tations are no more than four aspects of one and the
same truth, and all are necessary to complete its full
meaning. They all implicitly or explicitly contain
the perpetual stability of Peter's faith. It would
be out of place to enter upon this here. It is enough
to refer to Ballerini De m et ratione Primatus, where
the subject is exhausted.

In these two promises a divine assistance is pledged
to Peter and to his successors, and that divine assist-
ance is promised to secure the stability and indefecti-
bility of the Faith in the supreme Doctor and Head
of the Church, for the general good of the Church
itself.

It is therefore a charisma, a grace of the super-
natural order, attached to the Primacy of Peter which
is perpetual in his successors.

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 85

I need hardly point out that between the charisma,
or gratia gratis data of infallibility and the idea of
impeccability there is no connection. I should not
so much as notice it, if some had not strangely
obscured the subject by introducing this confusion.
I should have thought that the gift of prophecy in
Balaam and Caiaphas, to say nothing of the powers
of the priesthood, which are the same in good and
bad alike, would have been enough to make such
confusion impossible.

The preface to the Definition carefully lays down
that infallibility is not inspiration. The Divine assist-
ance by which the Pontiffs are guarded from error,
when as Pontiffs they teach in matters of faith and
morals, contains no new revelation. Inspiration con-
tained not only assistance in writing but sometimes
the suggestion of truths not otherwise known. The
Pontiffs are witnesses, teachers, and judges of the reve-
lation already given to the Church; and in guarding,
expounding, and defending that revelation, their wit-
ness, teaching, and judgment, is by Divine assistance
preserved from error. This assistance, like the reve-
lation which it guards, is of the supernatural order.
They, therefore, who argue against the infallibility of
the Pontiff because he is an individual person, and
still profess to believe the infallibility of Bishops
in General Councils, and also of the Bishops dispersed
throughout the world, because they are many wit-
' nesses, betray the fact that they have not as yet
mastered the idea that infallibility is not of the order
of nature, but is of the order of grace. In the order
of nature, indeed, truth may be found rather with the

86 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

many than with the individual, though in this the
history of mankind would give a host of contrary
examples. But in the supernatural order, no such
argument can have place. It depends simply upon
the ordination of God ; and certainly neither in the
Old Testament nor in the New have we examples
of infallibility depending upon number. But in both
we have the example of infallibility attaching to per-
sons as individuals ; as for instance the Prophets
of the old and the Apostles of the new law. It is
no answer to say that the Apostles were united
in one body. They were each one possessed of
that which all possessed together. To this may be
also added the inspired writers, who were preserved
from error individually and personally, and not as a
collective body. The whole evidence of Scripture,
therefore, is in favour of the communication of Divine
gifts to individuals. The objection is not scriptural
nor Catholic, nor of the supernatural order, but
natural, and, in the last analysis, rationalistic.

IV. Fourthly, the Definition precisely determines
the acts of the Pontiff to which this Divine assistance
is attached ; namely, ' in doctrina de fide vel moribus
definiendaj to the defining of doctrine of faith and
morals.

The definition, therefore, carefully excludes all
ordinary and common acts of the Pontiff as a private
person, and also all acts of the Pontiff as a private
theologian, and again all his acts which are not in
matters of faith and morals; and further, all acts in
which he does not define a doctrine, that is, in which
he does not act as the supreme Doctor of the Church

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 87

in defining doctrines to be held by the whole
Church.

The definition therefore includes, and includes
only, the solemn acts of the Pontiff as the supreme
Doctor of all Christians, defining doctrines of faith
and morals, to be held by the whole Church.

Now the word doctrine here signifies a revealed
truth, traditionally handed down by the teaching
authority, or magisterium infallibile, of the Church;
including any truth which, though not revealed, is
yet so united with a revealed truth as to be insepa-
rable from its full explanation, and defence.

And the word definition here signifies the precise
judgment or sentence in which any such traditional
truth of faith or morals may be authoritatively for-
mulated ; as, for instance, the consubstantiality of the
Son, the procession of the Holy Ghost by one only
Spiration from the Father and the Son, the Immacu-
late Conception, and the like.

The word ' definition 7 has two senses, the one
forensic and narrow, the other wide and common;
and this in the present instance is more correct. The
forensic or narrow sense confines its meaning to the
logical act of defining by genus and differentia. But
this sense is proper to dialectics and disputations,
not to the acts of Councils and Pontiffs. The wide
and common sense is that of an authoritative ter-
mination of questions which have been in doubt and
debate, and therefore of the judgment or sentence
thence resulting. When the second Council of Lyons
says, ' Si qu»3 subortaB fuerint fidei quaestiones suo
judicio debere definiri,' it means that the questions

88 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

of faith ought to be ended by this judgment of the
Pontiff. Definire is finem imponere, or finaliter judi-
care. It is therefore equivalent to determinare, or
finaliter determinare, which words are those of St.
Thomas when speaking of the supreme authority of
the Roman Pontiff. It is in this sense that the
Vatican Council uses the word definienda. It signi-
fies the final decision by which any matter of faith
and morals is put into a doctrinal form.

Now it is to be observed that the definition does
not speak of either controversies, or questions of faith
and morals. It speaks of the doctrinal authority of
the Pontiff in general; and therefore both of what
may be called pacific definitions like that of the Im-
maculate Conception, and of controversial definitions
like those of St. Innocent against the Pelagians, or St.
Leo against the Monophy sites. Moreover, under the
term definitions, as we have seen, are included all
dogmatic judgments. In the Bull Auctorem Fidel
these terms are used as synonymous. The tenth
proposition of the Synod of Pistoia is condemned as
'Detrahens firmitati definitionum, judiciorumve dog-
maticorum EcclesiaB.' In the Italian version made
by order of the Pope these words are translated,
' detraente alia fermezza delle definizioni o giudizj
dommatici della Chiesa.' Now, dogmatic judgments
included all judgments in matters of dogma; as for
instance, the inspiration and authenticity of sacred
books, the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of human and
uninspired books.

But intimately connected with dogma in these
judgments, as we have already seen, is the gram-

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 89

matical and literal sense of such texts. The theo-
logical sense of such texts cannot be judged of with-
out a discernment of their grammatical and literal
sense; and both are included in the same dogmatic
judgment, that is, both the dogmatic truth and the
dogmatic fact.

The example above given, in which the Pontiffs
approved and commended to the Church, as a rule of
faith against Pelagianism, the writings of St. Augus-
tine, was a true definition of doctrine in faith and
morals. The condemnation of the c Augustinus ' of
Jansenius, and of the five propositions extracted
from it, was also a doctrinal definition, or a dogmatic
judgment.

In like manner all censures, whether for heresy or
with a note less than heresy, are doctrinal definitions
in faith and morals, and are included in the words in
doctrina de fide vel moribus definienda.

In a word, the whole magisterium or doctrinal
authority of the Pontiff as the supreme Doctor of all
Christians, is included in this definition of his in-
fallibility. And also all legislative or judicial acts,
so far as they are inseparably connected with his
doctrinal authority; as, for instance, all judgments,
sentences, and decisions, which contain the motives of
such acts as derived from faith and morals. Under
this will come laws of discipline, canonisation of
Saints, approbation of religious Orders, of devotions,
and the like; all of which intrinsically contain the
truths and principles of faith, morals, and piety.

The Definition, then, limits the infallibility of the
Pontiff to his supreme acts ex cathedra in faith and

90 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

morals, but extends his infallibility to all acts in
the fullest exercise of his supreme magisterium or
doctrinal authority.

V. Fifthly, the definition declares that in these
acts the Pontiff 4 ea infallibilitate pollere, qua Divinus
Kedemptor Ecclesiam suam in definienda doctrina de
fide et moribus instructam esse voluit ; ' that is, that
he is possessed of the infallibility with which our
Divine Saviour willed that His Church should be
endowed.

It is to be carefully noted that this definition
declares that the Roman Pontiff possesses by himself
the infallibility with which the Church in unison
with him is endowed.

The definition does not decide the question whether
the infallibility of the Church is derived from him or
through him. But it does decide that his infallibility
is not derived from the Church, nor through the
Church. The former question is left untouched.
Two truths are affirmed ; the one, that the supreme
and infallible doctrinal authority was given to Peter,
the other, that the promise of the Holy Spirit was
afterwards extended to the Apostles. The promises
4 Ego rogavi pro te,' and ' Non praevalebunt,' were
spoken to Peter alone. The. promises ' He shall
lead you into all truth,' and ; Behold, I am with
you all days,' were spoken to Peter with all the
Apostles. The infallibility of Peter was, therefore,
not dependent on his union with them in exer-
cising it; but, their infallibility was evidently de-
pendent on their union with him- In like manner,
the whole Episcopate gathered in Council is not in-

THE TWO CONSTITUTIONS. 91

fallible without its head. But the head is always
infallible by himself. Thus far the definition is ex-
press, and the infallibility of the Vicar of Christ
is declared to be the privilegium Petri, a charisma
attached to the primacy, a Divine assistance given
as a prerogative of the Head. There is, therefore, a
special fitness in the word pollere in respect to the
Head of the Church. This Divine assistance is his
special prerogative depending on God alone; inde-
pendent of the Church, which in dependence on him
is endowed with the same infallibility. If the defi-
nition does not decide that the Church derives its
infallibility from the Head, ic does decide that the
Head does not derive his infallibility from the Church;
for it affirms this Divine assistance to be derived
from the promise to Peter and in Peter to his suc-
cessors.

VI. Lastly, the definition fixes the dogmatic value
of these Pontifical acts ex cathedra, by declaring that
they are c ex sese, non autem ex consensu Ecclesice, irre-
formabilia] that is, irreformable in and of themselves,
and not because the Church or any part or any mem-
bers of the Church should assent to them. These
words, with extreme precision, do two things. First,
they ascribe to the Pontifical acts ex cathedra, in
faith or morals an intrinsic infallibility; and secondly,
they exclude from them all influx of any other cause
of such intrinsic infallibility. It is ascribed alone to
the Divine assistance given to the Head of the Church
for that end and effect.

I need not add, that by these words many forms of
error are excluded : as, first, the theory that the joint

92 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

action of the Episcopate congregated in Council is
necessary to the infallibility of the Pontiff; secondly,
that the consent of the Episcopate dispersed is re-
quired ; thirdly, that if not the express at least the
tacit assent of the Episcopate is needed. All these
alike deny the infallibility of the Pontiff till his acts
are confirmed by the Episcopate. I know, indeed,
it has been said by some, that in so speaking they
do not deny the infallibility of the Pontiff, but
affirm him to be infallible when he is united with the
Episcopate, from which they further affirm that he
can never be divided. But this, after all, resolves the
efficient cause of his infallibility into union with the
Episcopate, and makes its exercise dependent upon
that union; which is to deny his infallibility as a
privilege of the primacy, independent of the Church
which he is to teach and to confirm. The words ' Ex
sese, non autem ex consensu EcclesiceJ preclude all
ambiguity by which for two hundred years the
promise of our Lord to Peter and his successors has
in some minds been obscured.

CHAPTER III.

THE TERMINOLOGY OF THE DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY.

I WILL now add a few words respecting the terms
which have been used, not only in the course of the
last months, but in the traditional theology of the
Schools, on the doctrine of Infallibility.

Certain well-known writers have rendered memor-
able the formula of 4 personal, separate, independent
and absolute infallibility.' It has not only been used
in pastoral letters, and pamphlets, but introduced
into high diplomatic correspondence.

The frequency and confidence with which this for-
mula was repeated, as if taken from the writings of
the promoters of the Definition, made it not unnatural
to examine into the origin, history, and meaning of
the formula itself. I therefore set myself to search
it out; and I employed others to do the same. As
it had been ascribed to myself, our first examination
was turned to anything I might have written. After
repeated search, not only was the formula as a whole
nowhere to be discovered, but the words of which it
is composed were, with the exception of the word ' in-
dependent,' equally nowhere to be found. I mention
this, that I may clear away the supposition that in
what I add I have any motive of defending myself

94 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

or anything I may have written. I speak of it now
simply for the truth's sake, and for charity, which is
always promoted by a clear statement of truth, and
never by the confused noise of controversy ; and also
to justify some of the most eminent defenders of
Catholic doctrine, by showing that this terminology
is to be found in the writings of many of our greatest
theologians.

I may remind you, in passing, that in the Definition
not a trace of this formula nor of its component words
is to be found.

First, as to the word personal. Cardinal Toletus,
speaking of the doctrine of infallibility, says, ' The
first opinion is, that the privilege of the Pope, that of
not erring in faith, is personal; and cannot be com-
municated to another.' After quoting our Lord's
words, ' I have prayed for thee,' &c. he adds, ' I con-
cede that this privilege is personal.' *

Ballerini says, that the jurisdiction of St. Peter, by
reason of the primacy, was ' singular and personal ' to
himself. The same right he affirms to belong also
to the Roman Pontiffs, St. Peter's successors.' f

This doctrine he explains diffusely.

4 This primacy of chief jurisdiction, not of mere
order, in St. Peter and the Roman Pontiffs his suc-
cessors, is personal, that is, attached to their person :

* ' Prima est quod privilegium Papas ut in fide errare non possit
est personale, nee ipse potest alter! communicare, Luc. xxii. : "Ego
rogavi pro te, Petre, et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres
tuos." Ad primum concedo esse illud privilegium personale : ob id
communicari non potest.' — Toletus, In Summ. Enarr. torn. ii. pp. 62,
64. Rome 1869.

t ' Jurisdintio et prerogative qua? eidem sedi ab antiquis asse-

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 95

and therefore a supreme personal right, which is
communicated to no other, is contained in the
primacy.

4 Hence, when there is question of the rights and the
jurisdiction proper to the primacy, and when these are
ascribed to the Roman See, or Cathedra, or Church of
St. Peter; by the name of the Roman See or Cathedra,
or Church, to which this primacy of jurisdiction is
ascribed, the single person of the Roman Pontiff is to
be understood, to whom alone the same primacy is
attached.

4 Hence again it follows, that whatsoever belongs to
the Roman See or Cathedra or Church, by reason of
the primacy, is so to be ascribed to the person of the
Roman Pontiffs that they need help or association of
none for the exercise of that right.' *

From this passage three conclusions flow :

1. First, that the Primacy is a personal privilege in
Peter and his successors.

runtur ratione primatus ejusdem Petri ac successorum singulares
etpersonales judicandaa sunt.' — Ballerini, de Vi et Ratione Primatus,
cap. iii. sect. 5, p. 14. Rome, 1849.

* ' Hie praecipuas jurisdictionis et non meri ordinis primatus
S. Petri et Romanorum Pontificum ejus successorum personalia est,
sen ipsorum personse alligatus ; ac proinde jus quoddam praecipuum
ipsorum personale, id est, nulli alii commune, in eo primatu con-
tirieri debet. Hinc cum de jure, seu jurisdictione propria primatus
agitur, hascque Romans S. Petri sedi, cathedrse, vel Ecclesise
tribuitur ; sedjs cathedrae vel Ecclesias Romanas nomine, cui ea
jurisdictio primatus propria asseratur, una Romani Pontificis per-
sona intelligenda est, cui uni idem primatus est alligatus. Hinc
quoque sequitur, quidquid juris ratione primatus Romanse sedi
cathedrse, vel Ecclesias competit, Romanorum Pontificum persons
ita esse tribuendum ut nullius adjutorio vel societate ad idem jus
exercendum indigeant.' — Ballerini, de Vi et Ratione Primatus,
cap. iii. propositio 3, p. 10.

96 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

2. Secondly, that this personal privilege attaches
to Peter and to the Roman Pontiffs alone.

3. Thirdly, that in exercising this same primacy the
Roman Pontiff needs the help and society of no other.

Ballerini then adds :

4 That what was personal in Peter by reason of the
primacy, is to be declared personal in his successors
the Roman Pontiffs, on whom the same primacy of
Peter with the same jurisdiction has devolved, no one
can deny.

c Therefore to Peter alone, and to the person alone
of his successors, the dignity and jurisdiction of the
Primacy is so attached, that it can be ascribed to no
other Bishop, even though of the Chief Sees; and
much less can it be ascribed to any number whatso-
ever of Bishops congregated together; nor in that
essential jurisdiction of the primacy ought the Roman
Pontiff to depend on any one whomsoever; nor can
he; especially as the jurisdiction received from Christ
was instituted by Christ un- circumscribed by any con-
dition, and personal in Peter alone and his successors :
like as He instituted the primacy of jurisdiction to
be personal, which without personal jurisdiction is
unintelligible.' *

* ' Quod autem personale in Petro fuit ratione primatus, idem in
successoribus ejus Eomanis Pontificibus, in quos idem primatus
Petri cum eadem jurisdictione transivit, personale esse dicendum,
inficiari potest nemo. Soli igitur Petro et soli successorum ejus
personse ita alligata est propria primatus dignitas et jurisdic-
tio ut nulli alii Episcopo pra3stantiorum licet sedium, et minus
multo pluribus aliis Episcopis quantumvis in unum collectis, possit
adscribi : neque in ea jurisdictione primatus essentiali Romanus
Pontifex dependere ab alio quopiam debet aut potest, cum prae-
sertim ipsam a Christo acceptam idem Christus nulla conditione

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTHINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 97

From these statements it follows :

1. First, that what depends on no other is altogether
independent.

2. Secondly, that what is circumscribed by 110 con-
dition is absolute.

3. Thirdly, that what is by God committed to one
alone, depends on God alone.

But perhaps it will be said that all this relates not
to infallibility, but to the power of jurisdiction only.
To this I answer :

1. That if the primacy be personal, all its prero-
gatives are personal.

2. That the doctrinal authority of the Pontiff is a
part of his jurisdiction, and is therefore personal.

3. That infallibility is, as the Definition expressly
declares, a supernatural grace, or charisma, attached
to the primacy in order to its proper exercise. Infalli-
bility is a quality of the doctrinal jurisdiction of the
Pontiff in faith and morals.

And such also is the doctrine of Ballerini, who lays
down the following propositions :

'Unity with the Roman faith is absolutely necessary,
and therefore the prerogative of absolute infallibility
is to be ascribed to it, and a coercive power to con-
strain to unity of faith, in like manner, absolute; as
also the infallibility and coercive power of the Catho-
lic Church itself, which is bound to adhere to the faith
of Rome, is absolute.' *

circumscriptam, personalem solius Petri ac successorum esse in-
fc-tituerit, uti primatum jurisdictionis instituit personalem, qui sine
personal! jurisdictione intelligi nequit.-- Ballerini, de Vi et Ratione
Primatus, cap. iii. sect. 4, p. 13.

* Ballerini, de Vi et Hat. Primatus : Unitas cum Komana fide abso-

98 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

But Bailer iiii has declared that whatsoever is as-
cribed to the Roman See, Cathedra, or Church is to
be ascribed to the person of the Roman Pontiff only.
Therefore this infallibility and coercive power are to
be ascribed to him, and are personal.

Here we have the infallibility personal, indepen-
dent, and absolute, fully and explicitly taught by two
chief theologians of great repute.

But hitherto we have not met the word separate,
though in truth the word sole, or alone, is equivalent.

I will therefore add certain quotations from the
great Dominican School.

Bzovius, the continuator of the Annals of Baronius,
gays, ' To Peter alone, and after him to all the Roman
Pontiffs legitimately succeeding, the privilege of in-
fallibility, as it is called, was conceded by the Prince
of Pastors, Christ who is God.' *

Dominicus Marchese writes : ' This privilege was
conceded to the successors of Peter alone without the
assistance of the College of Cardinals;' and again, ' To
the Roman Pontiff alone, in the person of Peter, was
committed the care of the Universal Church, and
. firmness, and certainty in denning matters of faith.' f

lute necessaria est, ac proinde infallibilatis prasrogativa absoluta illi
est tribuenda, et vis coactiva ad fidei unitatem pariter absoluta :
sicuti absoluta est item infallibilitas et vis coactiva ipsius Ecclesite
Catholics, qua? Romans fidei adhaerere oportet. Appendix De infall.
Pont. Prop. vii.

* ' Soli Petro et post eum omnibus Romanis Pontificibus legitime
sedentibus, infallibilitatis quod vocant privilegium, a Principe
pastorum Christo Deo concessum, ut in rebus fidei, morum doc-
trina, et universalis Ecclesia? administratione certissima nullaque
fallacies nota inumbrata decreta veritatis ipsius radio scribant
edicant et sanciant.' — Bzovius de Pontiftce Romano, cap. xiv. p. 106 ;
apud Rocaberti, Biblioth. Pontif. torn. i. Rome, 1698.

j ' Soli Petro secluso ab Apostolis ac proinde soli euis successor!

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 99

Gravina teaches as follows : ' To the Pontiff, as one
(person) and alone, it was given to be the head ; '
and again, ' The Eoman Pontiff for the time being is
one, therefore he alone has infallibility.'*

Vincentius Ferre says, c The exposition of certain
Paris (doctors) is of no avail, who affirm that Christ
only promised that the faith should not fail of the
Church founded upon Peter; and not that it should
not fail in the successors of Peter taken apart from
(seorsum) the Church.' He adds that our Lord said,
c I have prayed for thee, Peter ; sufficiently showing
that the infallibility was not promised to the Church
as apart from (seorsum) the head, but promised to
the head, that from him it should be derived to the
Church.' f

Marchese, before quoted, repeats the same words,

Summo Pontifici secluso Cardinalium Collegio hoc privilegium con-
ceasit.' — Marchese, de Capite visibili Ecclesice, disput. iii. dub. 2,
p. 719; apud Rocaberti, torn. ix.

* Soli Romano Pontifici in persona Petri commissa est cura
totius Ecclesiae et firmitas et certitudo in definiendo res fidei.' — Mar-
chese, disput. v. dub. 1, sect. 2, p. 785 ; apud Rocaberti, torn. ix.

* ' Uni et soli Pontifici datura est esse caput.' — Gravina, de su-
premo Judice controv. Fidei, qurcst. i. apud Rocaberti, torn. viii.
p. 392.

' Nullus in terra reperitur alter, qui coeteris sit in fide firmior et
constantior sciatur esse quam unus Pontifex Romanus pro tempore ;
ergo et ipse solus habet infallibilitatem.' — Gravina, quasst. ii. apud
Rocaberti, toni. viii. p. 422.

t ' Nee valet expositio aliquorum Parisiensium affirmantium hie
Christum tantum promisisse fidem non defecturam Ecclesise fundatas
super Petrum, non vero promisisse non defecturam in successor! bus
Petri seorsum ab Ecclesia sumptis. Christus dicens, ego autem
rogavi pro te Petre, satis designat hanc infallibilitatem non pro-
missam Ecclesia? ut seorsum a capite, sed promissam capiti, ut ex
illo derivetur ad Ecclesiam.' — Ferre, De Fide, qusest. xii. apud
Rocaberti, torn. xx. p. 388.

H 2

100 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

4 The infallibility in faith which (our Lord) promised,
not to the Church apart from (seorsum) the head,
but to the head, that from him it should be derived
to the Church.' * Billuart also says ' (Christ) makes
a clear distinction of Peter from the rest of the
Apostles, and from the whole Church, when He says,
And thou, &c.' f

Peter Soto writes: 'When this (Pasce oves meas,
&c.) was said to Peter in the presence of the rest of
the Apostles, it was said to Peter as one, and as apart
from (seorsum) the rest.7 J

And Marchese again, ' Therefore to Peter alone
set apart from the Apostles (secluso ab Apostolis), and
therefore to his successor alone, the Supreme Pontiff,
set apart from the College of Cardinals, He (our
Lord) conceded this privilege. '§

Lastly, F. Gatti, the learned professor of theology
of the Dominican Order at this day, writing of the
words, 4I have prayed for thee,' &c., says, 'inde-
fectibility is promised to Peter apart from (seorsum)

* ' Satis designat infallibilitatem in fide quam promisit, non
Ecclesiee seorsum a Capite sed Capiti ut ex illo derivetur ad Eccle-
siam.' — Marchese, de capite Visib. Eccles. disput. iii. dub. 2 ;
apud Rocaberti, torn. ix. p. 719.

| ' Facit enim apertam distinctionem Petri ab aliis apostolis et a
tota Ecclesia cum dicit, et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres
tuos.' — Billuart, de Regulis Fidei, dissert, iv. art. 5, sect. 2, torn. iv.
p. 78. Venice, 1787.

{ ' Dum vero hoc Petro coram cagteris apostolis dicitur, uni,
inquam, Petro et a caateris seorsum.' — Petrus Soto, Defensio Ca-
tholicce Confessionis, cap. 82, apud Rocaberti, torn, xviii. p. 73.

§ * Ergo soli Petro secluso ab Apostolis ac proinde soli ejus suc-
cessor! summo Pontifici, secluso Cardinalium collegio, hoc privi-
legium concessit.' — Marchese, de Capite visib. Eccles. disp. iii.
dub. 2 ; apud Rocaberti, torn. ix. p. 715.

TEKMINOLO'GY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 101

the Church, or from the Apostles; but it is not
promised to the Apostles, or to the Church, apart
from (seorsum) the head, or with the head,' and
afterwards he adds, ' Therefore Peter, even apart
from (seorsum) the Church, is infallible.'*

Muzzarelli, in his treatise on the primacy and in-
fallibility of the Pontiff, uses the same terms again and
again ; of which the following is an example. Speak-
ing as in the person of the Pontiff, he says, ' If I
separately from a Council propose any truth to be
believed by the Universal Church, it is most certain
that I cannot err.'f

In like manner Mauro Cappellari, afterwards Gre-
gory XVI., affirms that the supreme judge of con-
troversies is the Pontiff, ; distinct and separate from
all other Bishops : and that his decree in things of
faith ought by them to be held without doubt. 'J

Lastly, Clement VI., in the fourteenth century,
proposed to the Armenians certain interrogations, of
which the fourth is as follows :

4 Hast thou believed, and dost thou still believe,
that the Roman Pontiff alone, can by an authentic

* ' Indefectibilitas promittitur Petro seorsum ab Ecclesia seu ab
Apostolis; non vero promittitur Apostolis seu Ecclesiae sive seorsum a
capite, sive una cum capite.- — Ergo Petrus etiam seorsum ab Ecclesia
spectatus est infallibilis.' — Gatti, Institutions Apologetico-Polemicce.
apud Bianchi de Constitution* Monarchica Ecclesice, p. 124.
Rome, 1870.

t 'Ne viene che se anch' io separatamente dal concilio vorr6
propone alia chiesa universale la verita da credersi su questo arti-
colo, non potro certamente errare.' — Muzzarelli, Primato ed Infal-
libilita del Papa, in II Buon Uso della Logica, torn. i. p. 183.
Florence, 1821.

t II Trionfo della Santa Sede, Cap. v. Sect. 10, p. 124. Venezia,
1832.

102 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

determination to which we must inviolably adhere,
put an end to doubts which arise concerning the
Catholic faith; and that whatsoever he, by the author-
ity of the keys delivered to him by Christ, determines
to. be true, is true and Catholic ; and what he deter-
mines to be false and heretical is to be so esteemed ?' *

In the above passages we have infallibility personal,
absolute, independent, without the Apostles, without
the College of Cardinals, alone, apart from the
Church, separate from Councils and from Bishops.

I am not aware of any modern writer who has
used language so explicit and fearless.

We will now ascertain the scholastic meaning of
these terms; and we shall see that they are in precise
accordance with the definition of the Council.

You need not be reminded, Eeverend and dear
Brethren, of the terminology of Canonists in treating
the subject of privileges.

A privilege is a right, or faculty bestowed upon
persons, places, or things.

Privileges therefore are of three kinds, personal,
real, and mixed.f

A personal privilege is that which attaches to the
person as such.

A real privilege attaches either to a place, or to a
thing, or to an office.

* ' Si credidisti et adhuc credis solum Komanmn Pontificem,
dubiis emergent! bus circa fidem catholicam posse per determina-
tionem authenticam cui sit inviolabiliter adhaerendum, finem im-
ponere et esse verum et Catholicum quidquid ipse auctoritate cla-
vium sibi traditarum a Christo determinat esse verum ; et quod
determinat esse falsum et heereticum sit censendum.' — Baronius,
torn. xxv. ad ann. 1351, p. 529. Lucca, 1750.

f Reiffenstuel. Tit. de Privileg. lib. v. 34, 12.

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 103

A mixed privilege may be both personal arid real ;
it may also attach to a community or body of persons,
as to an University, or a College, or a Chapter.

The primacy, including jurisdiction and infallibility,
is a privilege attaching to the person of Peter and of
his successors. It is therefore a personal privilege
in the Pontiffs.

It is personal, as Toletus says, because it cannot
be communicated to others. It is not a real privi-
lege attached to the See, or Cathedra, or Church of
Rome, and therefore to the person ; but to the person
of the Roman Pontiff, and therefore, to the See.

It is not a mixed privilege, attaching to the Pontiff,
only in union with a community or body, such as
the Episcopate, congregated or dispersed; but attach-
ing to his person, because inherent in the primacy,
which he alone personally bears.

The use of the word personal is. therefore precise
and correct, according to the scholastic terminology;
not, indeed, according to the sense of newspaper
theologians. Theology, like chancery law, has its
technical language; and the common sense of Eng-
lishmen would keep them from using it in any other
meaning.

In this sense it is that the Dominican theologian
De Fiume says, ' There are two things ... in
Peter: one personal, and another public; as Pastor
and Head of the Church. Some things therefore be-
long to the person of . Peter alone, and do not pass
to his successors ; as the saying, Get thee behind me
Satan . . . and the like. Some, again, are spoken
of him as a public person, and by reason of his office

104 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

as supreme Head and Pastor of the Universal Church,
as, Feed My sheep, &c.'*

Therefore, infallibility is the privilege of Peter not
as a private person, but as a public person holding
the primacy over the Universal Church.

In the Pastoral addressed to you so long ago as
the year 1867, this was pointed out in the unmistak-
able words of Cardinal Sfondratus. ' The Pontiff/
he says, ' does some things as a man, some things as
a prince, some as doctor, some as Pope, that is, as
head and foundation of the Church ; and it is only to
these (last-named) actions that we attribute the gift
of infallibility. The others we leave to his human
condition. As then not every action of the Pope is
papal, so not every action of the Pope enjoys the
papal privilege. 'f

The value therefore of this traditional language of
the schools is evident.

When the infallibility of the Pontiff is said to be
personal, it is to exclude all doubt as to the source
from which infallibility is derived ; and to declare

* ' Duo namque sunt in Petro. Unum personale et aliud pub-
licum, ut Pastor et caput Ecclesise. Qusedam ergo tantummodo
personas Petri conveniunt, ad successores non transeunt ; ut quod
dicatur : Vade post me, Satana, et similia. QuaBdam vero dicuntur
de eo quatenus est persona publica, et ratione officii Supremi
Capitis et Pastoris Ecclesias universalis; ut Pasce oves meas, &c.' —
Ignatius de Fiume, Schola veritatis orthodoxce, apud Bianchi, de
Constitutione Monarchica Ecclesice, p. 88. Rome, 1870.

•f ' Pontifex aliqua facit ut homo, aliqua ut Princeps, aliqua ut
Doctor, aliqua ut Papa, hoc est ut caput et fundamentum Ecclesise :
et his solis actionibus privilegium infallibilitatis adscribimus : alias
humanae condition! relinquimus : sicut ergo non omnis actio Papas
est papalis, ita non omnis actio Papae papali privilegio gaudet.' —
Sfondrati, Regale Sacerdottum, lib. iii. sec. 1.

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 105

that it is not a privilegium mixtum inherent in
the Episcopate, or communicated by it to the head
of the Church; but a special assistance of the Spirit
of Truth attaching to the primacy, and therefore
to the person who bears the primacy, Peter arid
his successors ; conferred on them by Christ Himself
for the confirmation of the Church in faith.

2. Next, as to the term separate. The sense in
which theologians have, used this term is obvious.
They universally and precisely apply it to express the
same idea as the word personal ; namely, that in the
possession arid exercise of this privilege of infallibility
the successor of Peter depends on no one but God.
The meaning of decapitation, decollation, and cutting
off, of a headless body, and a bodiless head, I have
hardly been able to persuade myself, has ever, by
serious men, at least in serious moods, been imputed
to such words as separatim, seorswn, or sedusis
Episcopis.

My reason for this doubt is, that such a monstrous
sense includes at least six heresies ; and I could
hardly think that any Catholic would fail to know
this, or, knowing it, would impute it to Catholics, still
less to Bishops of the Church.

The words seorsum, &c., may have two meanings,
one obviously false, the other as obviously true.

The former sense would be disunion of the head
from the body of the Episcopate and the faithful, or
separation from Catholic communion ; the latter, an in-
dependent action in the exercise of his supreme office.

And first of the former :

1. It is defide, or matter of faith, that the head of

106 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the Church, as such, can never be separated, either
from the Ecclesia docens, or the Ecclesia discens ; that
is, either from the Episcopate or from the faithful.

To suppose this, would be to deny the perpetual
indwelling office of the Holy Ghost in the Church,
by which the mystical body is knit together; the
head to the Body, the Body to the head, the
members to each other ; and to c dissolve Jesus,' * that
is, to destroy the perfect symmetry and organisation
which the Apostle describes as the body of Christ ;
and St. Augustine speaks of as ' one man, head and
body, Christ and the Church a perfect man.'f On
this unity all the properties and endowments of the
Church depend ; indefectibility, unity, infallibility.
As the Church can never be separated from its in-
visible Head, so never from its visible head.

2. Secondly, it is matter of faith that the Ecclesia
docens or the Episcopate, to which together with
Peter, and as it were, in one person with him, the
assistance of the Holy Ghost was promised, can
never be dissolved ; but it would be dissolved if it
were separated from its head. Such separation
would destroy the infallibility of the Church itself.
The Ecclesia docens would cease to exist; but this is
impossible, and without heresy cannot be supposed.

3. Thirdly, it is also matter of faith that not only
no separation of communion, but even no disunion of
doctrine and faith between the Head and the Body,

* St. John iv. 3, i Omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum,' &c.

•\ ' Unus homo caput et corpus, unus homo Christus et Ecclesia
vir perfectus.' — S. Augustin. In Psalm xviii. torn. iv. p. 85, 86, ed.
Ben. Paris, 1681.

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 107

that is, between the Ecclesia docens and discens,
can ever exist. Both are infallible ; the one ac-
tively, in teaching, the other passively, in believing;
and both are therefore inseparably, because neces-
sarily, united in one faith. Even though a num-
ber of bishops should fall away, as in the Arian and
Nestorian heresies, yet the Episcopate could never
fall away. It would always remain united, by the
indwelling of the Holy Ghost, to its head ; and the
reason of this inseparable union is precisely the infalli-
bility of its head. Because its head can never err,
it, as a body, can never err. How many soever, as in-
dividuals, should err and fall away from the truth, the
Episcopate would remain, and therefore never be dis-
united from its head in teaching or believing. Even
a minority of the Bishops united to the head, would
be the Episcopate of the Universal Church. They,
therefore, and they only, teach the possibility of such
a separation, who assert that the Pontiff may fall into
error. But they who deny his infallibility do ex-
pressly assert the possibility of such a separation.
And yet it is they who have imputed to the defenders
of the Pontifical infallibility, that separation which
on 4 Ultramontane ' principles is impossible ; but, on
the principles of those who lay the charge, such a
separation is not only possible, but even of probable
occurrence.

So far, we have spoken of the idea of separation
from communion, or disunion in faith and doctrine.
But farther, the separate or independent exercise of
the supreme Pontifical authority in no way imports
separation or disunion of any kind.

108 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

1. It is de jide that the plenitude of jurisdiction
was given to Peter and his successors ; and that its
exercise over the whole body, pastors and people,
imports no separation or disunion from the Body.
How then should the exercise of infallibility, which
is attached to that jurisdiction, import separation?

2. Again, it is de fide that this supreme juris-
diction and infallibility was given to maintain and
perpetuate the unity of the Church. How then can
its exercise produce separation, which it is divinely
ordained to prevent ?

It is therefore de fide that its exercise excludes
separation, and binds the whole Church, both Body
and Head, in closer bonds of communion, doctrine
and faith.

3. Lastly, it is de jide that in the assistance pro-
mised to Peter and his successors, all the means
necessary for its due exercise are contained. An
infallible office fallibly exercised is a contradiction
in terms. The infallibility of the head consists in
this, that he is guided both as to the means and
as to the end. It is therefore contrary to faith to say,
that the independent exercise of this office, divinely
assisted, can import separation or disunion of any
kind. It is a part of the promise, that in the selection
of the means of its exercise, the successor of Peter
will not err. If he erred as to the means, either he
would err as to the end, or he would be preserved only
by a series of miracles. In escaping from the super-
natural, the objectors fall into the miraculous. The
Catholic doctrine of infallibility invokes no such in-
terventions. It affirms that a Divine assistance, pro-

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 109

portionate to the burden of the primacy, is attached
to it as a condition of its ordinary exercise, in bonurn
Ecdesice. The freedom as well as the prudence of
the Pontiffs, in selecting the means of exercising their
office of universal Doctor, is carefully expressed in
the fourth chapter of this Constitution. c The Roman
Pontiffs, as the state of times and events induced
them, sometimes by convoking (Ecumenical Councils,
or by ascertaining the mind of the Church dispersed
throughout the world, sometimes by local Synods,
sometimes by employing other helps which Divine
providence supplied, have defined, as truths to be
held, such things as they by God's assistance knew to
be in harmony with the Scriptures and Apostolical
traditions.' *

It may be well here to add two passages which
complete this subject.

Melchior Canus says : ' Inasmuch as God promised
firmness of faith to the Church, He cannot be
wanting to it, so as not to bestow upon the Church
prayers and other helps whereby that firmness is pre-
served. Nor can it be doubted that what happens in
natural things, the same occurs in supernatural ;
namely, that he who gives the end gives the means to
the end.'-

4 If God should promise an abundant harvest next
year, what could be more foolish than to doubt
whether men would sow seeds in the earth ? So
will I never admit that either Pontiff or Council
have omitted any necessary diligence in deciding
questions of faith. It might happen to any private

* Constit. Dogmat. Prima, de Eccl. Christi, cap. iv.

110 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

man, that he should not use diligent attention in
seeking truth, and yet to do so should entirely give
himself to the work, and, though his error be in-
culpable, nevertheless fall into error. But even
inculpable error is far from the Church of God, as
we have proved in a former book. Which fact is an
abundant argument that neither Pontiff nor Council
has omitted, in deliberation, any necessary thing.'
' Let us therefore grant that to the Judges consti-
tuted by God in the Church, none of those things
can be wanting which are necessary for a right and
true judgment.' *

Cerboni, a theologian of the Dominican order, says :
' When once anything of faith has been defined by
the Supreme Pontiff, it is not permitted to doubt
whether he has used all diligence before such de-
finition.'

* * Cum Ecclesias fidei firmitatem fuerit pollicitus, deesse non
potcst quominus tribuat Ecclesias preces, caeteraque prsesidia, quibus
haec firmitas conservator. Nee vero dubitari potest, quod in rebus
naturalibus contingit, idem in supernaturalibus usu venire ; ut qui
dat finem, det consequentia ad finem. — Quod si Deus in sequentem
annum frugnm abundantiam polliceretur, ecquid stultius esse posset
quam dubitare, anne homines semina terras mandaturi sint? — Ita
nunquam ego admittam aut Pontificem aut concilium diligentiam
aliquam necessariam qutestionibus fidei decernendis omisisse. Id
quod private cuicunque alteri homini accidere potest, ut nee dili-
gentem navet operara ad disquirendam \eritatem, et ut navaverit
integrumque sese in ea re prsestiterit, errat adhuc tamen, quamvis
error sine culpa sit. Error autem vel inculpatus ab Ecclesia Dei
longissime abest, quemadmodum libro superiore constituimus. Qua3
res abunde magno argumento est ut nee Pontifex nee concilia ne-
cessarium quicquam in deliberando prastermiserint. — Concedamus
ergo judicibus a Deo in Ecclesia constitutes nihil eorum deesse
posse, quae ad rectum verumque judicium sunt necessaria.' — Mel-
chior Canus, De Locis Theologicis, lib. v. cap. 5, pp. 120, 121.
Venice, 1776.

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. Ill

c It absolutely cannot be said, that the means
necessary for the Supreme Pontiff in the investigation
of truth have been neglected by him, even though he
should be supposed to have defined anything ex ca-
thedra, without first seeking the judgment of others/

4 The privilege of infallibility, when the Supreme
Pontiff defines anything ex cathedra, is to be ascribed
not to those whom he has previously consulted, but
to the Koman Pontiff himself.

1 Inasmuch as the truth and certainty of those
things which are defined " ex cathedra " depend on the
authority and infallibility of the Supreme Pontiff, it
is not necessarily requisite, that he should first consult
these (counsellors) rather than others, this rather than
that body, concerning the matter which he is about to
define ex cathedra.' *

From all that has been said, three things are beyond
question ; first, that the privilege of infallibility in the
head of the Church, neither by its possession nor by

* * Semel ac a Summo Pontifice quidpiam ad fidem spectans
definitum habeatur, dubitare non licet, utruin omnem diligentiam
ante hujusmodi defmitionem ille praemiserit.

Quse ad investigandam veritatem media in summo Pontifice re-
quiruntur, ab eo neglecta fuisse, absolute dici non potest, etiamsi
aliorum non exquisita sententia quidpiam ex cathedra definiisse
prtcsupponatur.

Privilegium infallibilitatis, dum a Summo Pontifice aliquid ex
cathedra definitur, non iis qui antea consult! fuerint, sed ipsi Eomano
Pontifici tribui debet.

Ex eo quod veritas et certitude eorum quse ex cathedra
definiuntur, a Summi Pontificis auctoritate et infallibilitate pen-
deant, non necessario requiritur, ut Summus Pontifex de eo quod
est ex cathedra definiturus, hos vel illos potius quam alios hunc vel
ilium ccetum prse alio antea consulat.' — Cerboni, De Jure et Legum
Disciplina, lib. 23, cap. 6, apud Biunchi de constitutione mon.
Eccles. p. 158. Home, 1870.

112 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

its exercise, can in any way import separation or dis-
union between the head and the body. Such a sup-
position involves, as we have seen, heretical notions
at every turn. The very reverse is true : that the
supreme privilege of infallibility in the head is the
divinely ordained means to sustain for ever the unity
of the Universal Church in communion, faith, and
doctrine.

And further, that the independent exercise of this
privilege by the head of the Episcopate, and as dis-
tinct from the Bishops, is the divinely ordained
means of the perpetual unity of the Episcopate in
communion and faith with its head and with its own
members.

And lastly, that though the consent of the Episco-
pate or the Church be not required, as a condition, to
the intrinsic value of the infallible definitions of the
Roman Pontiff, nevertheless, it cannot without heresy
be said or conceived that the consent of the Episco-
pate and of the Church can ever be absent. For if
the Pontiff be divinely assisted, both the active and
the passive infallibility of the Church exclude such a
supposition as heretical. To deny such infallible as-
sistance now after the definition, is heresy. And even
before the definition, to deny it was proximate to
heresy, because it was a revealed truth, and a Divine
fact, on which the unity of the Church has depended
from the beginning.

From what has been said, the precise meaning of
the terms before us may be easily fixed.

1 . The privilege of infallibility is personal, inasmuch
as it attaches to the Roman Pontiff, the successor of

TERMINOLOGY OF DOCTRINE OF INFALLIBILITY. 113

Peter, as a public person, distinct from, but inseparably
united to, the Church; but it is not personal, in that
it is attached, not to the private person, but to the
primacy, which he alone possesses.

2. It is also independent, inasmuch as it does not
depend upon either the Ecclesia docens or the Ecclesia
discens] but it is not independent, in that it depends
in all things upon the Divine Head of the Church,
upon the institution of the primacy by Him, and
upon the assistance of the Holy Ghost.

3. It is absolute, inasmuch as it can be circum-
scribed by no human or ecclesiastical law; it is not
absolute, in that it is circumscribed by the office of
guarding, expounding, and defending the deposit of
revelation.

4. It is separate in no sense, nor can be, nor can so
be called, without manifold heresy, unless the word be
taken to mean distinct. In this sense, the Roman
Pontiff is distinct from the Episcopate, and is a dis-
tinct subject of infallibility; and in the exercise of his
supreme doctrinal authority, or magisterium, he does
not depend for the infallibility of his definitions upon
the consent or consultation of the Episcopate, but only
on the Divine assistance of the Holy Ghost.

114 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CHAPTER IV.

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE CATHOLIC RULE OF FAITH.

IT may here be well to answer' an objection which
is commonly supposed to lie against the doctrine of
the Pontifical Infallibility ; namely, that the evidence
of history is opposed to it.

The answer is twofold.

1. First, that the evidence of history distinctly
proves the infallibility of the Roman Pontiif.

I shall be told that this is to beg the question.

To which I answer, they also who affirm the con-
trary beg the question.

Both sides appeal to history, and with equal con-
fidence; sometimes with equal clamour, arid often
equally in vain.

By some people ' The Pope and the Council,' by
Janus, is regarded as the most unanswerable work of
scientific history hitherto published.

By others it is regarded as the shallowest and most
pretentious book of the day.

Between such contradictory judgments who is to
decide ? Is there any tribunal of appeal in matters
of history? or is there no ultimate judge? Is history
a road where no one can err; or is it a wilderness in
which we must wander without guide or path? are

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 115

we all left to private judgment alone? If any one
say, that there is no judge but right reason or common,
sense, he is only reproducing in history what Luther
applied to the Bible.

This theory may be intellectually and morally pos-
sible to those who are not Catholics. In Catholics
such a theory is simple heresy. That there is an
ultimate judge in such matters of history as affect
the truths of revelation, is a dogma of faith. But
into this we will enter hereafter.

For the present, I will make only one other obser-
vation.

Let us suppose that the divinity of our Lord were
in controversy. Let us suppose that two hundred
and fifty-six passages from the Fathers were adduced
to prove that Jesus Christ is God. These two hun-
dred and fifty-six passages, we will say, may be dis-
tributed into three classes ; the first consisting of a
great number, in which the divinity of our Lord is
explicitly and unmistakably declared; the second, a
greater number which so assume or imply it as to
be inexplicable upon any other hypothesis; the third,
also numerous, capable of the same interpretation,
and incapable of the contrary interpretation, though
in themselves inexplicit.

We will suppose, next, one passage to exist in some
one of the Fathers, the aspect of which is adverse.
Its language is apparently contradictory to the hypo-
thesis that Jesus Christ is God. Its terms are ex-
plicit ; and, if taken at the letter, cannot be reconciled
with the doctrine of His divinity.

I need only remind you of St. Justin Martyr's

i 2

116 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

argument that the Angel who appeared to Moses in
the bush could not be the Father, but the Son,
because the Father could not be manifested 'in a
narrow space on earth;'* or even of the words of
our Divine Lord Himself, 'The Father is greater
than L'f

Now I would ask, what course would any man of
just and considerate intelligence pursue in such a
case?

Would he say, one broken link destroys a chain ?
One such passage adverse to the divinity of Christ
outweighs two hundred and fifty-six passages to the
contrary ?

Would this be scientific history ? Or would it be
scientific to assume that the one passage, however
apparently explicit and adverse, can bear only one
sense, and cannot in any other way be explained? If
so, scientific historians are bound to the literal prima
facie sense of the words of St. Justin Martyr, and of
our Lord above quoted.

Still, supposing the one passage to remain explicit
and adverse, and therefore an insoluble difficulty, I
would ask whether any but a Socinian, UTTO^SG-SI
SouXstW, servilely bound, and pledged by the per •
verseness of controversy, would reject the whole
cumulus of explicit and constructive evidence con-
tained in two hundred and fifty-six passages, because
of one adverse passage of insoluble difficulty ? People
must be happily unconscious of the elements which
underlie the whole basis of their most confident beliefs

* Dialog, cum Tryph. sect. 60, p. 157. Ed. Ben. Paris, 1742.
St. John xiv, 28.

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 117

if they would so proceed. But into this I will not
enter now. Enough to say, that such a procedure
would be so far from scientific that it would be super-
ficial, unintellectual, and absurd. I would ask, then, is
it science, or is it passion, to reject the cumulus of evi-
dence which surrounds the infallibility of two hundred
and fifty- six pontiffs, because of the case of Honorius,
even if supposed to be an insoluble difficulty? Real
science would teach us that in the most certain
systems there are residual phenomena which long
remain as insoluble difficulties, without in the least
diminishing the certainty of the system itself.

But, further, the case of Honorius is not an in-
soluble difficulty.

In the judgment of a cloud of the greatest theo-
logians of all countries, schools, and languages, since
the controversy was opened two hundred years ago, the
case of Honorius has been completely solved. Nay
more, it has been used with abundant evidence, drawn
from the very same acts and documents, to prove the
direct contrary hypothesis, namely, the infallibility of
the Roman pontiffs. But into this again I shall not
enter. It is enough for my present argument to
affirm that inasmuch as the case of Honorius has been
for centuries disputed, it is disputable. Again, inas-
much as it has been interpreted with equal confidence
for and against the infallibility of the Roman pontiff —
and I may add that they who have cleared Honorius
of personal heresy, are an overwhelming majority
compared with their opponents, and let it be said for
argument's sake, and with more than moderation, that
the probability of their interpretations at least equals

118 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

that of the opponents — for all these reasons I may,
with safety, affirm that, if the case of Honorius be
not solved, it is certainly not insoluble; and that
the long, profuse, and confident controversy of men
whom I will assume to be sincere, reasonable, and
learned on both sides, proves beyond question that
the case of Honorius is doubtful.

I would ask, then, is it scientific, or passionate to
reject the cumulus of evidence surrounding the line
of two hundred and fifty-six pontiffs, because one
case may be found which is doubtful? doubtful, too,
be it remembered, only on the theory that history
is a wilderness without guide or path; in no way
doubtful to those who, as a dogma of faith, believe
that the revelation of faith was anterior to its history
and is independent of it, being divinely secured by the
presence and assistance of Him who gave it.

And this is a sufficient answer to the case of
Honorius, which of all controversies is the most
useless, barren, and irrelevant.

I should hardly have thought, at this time of day,
that any theologian or scholar would have brought
up again the cases of Vigilius, Liberius, John XXII.,
&c. But as these often-refuted and senseless conten-
tions have been renewed, I give in the note references
to the works and places in which they are abundantly
answered.*

Such is the first part of the answer to the alleged
opposition of history.

2. We will now proceed to the second and more
complete reply.

* Appendix, p. 223.

SCIENTIFIC HISTOIIY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 119

The true and conclusive answer to this objection
consists, not in detailed refutation of alleged difficul-
ties, but in a principle of faith ; namely, that whenso-
ever any doctrine is contained in the Divine tradition
of the Church, all difficulties from human history are
excluded, as Tertullian lays down, by prescription.
The only source of revealed truth is God, the only
channel of His revelation is the Church. No human
history can declare what is contained in that revela-
tion. The Church alone can determine its limits, and
therefore its contents.

When then the Church, out of the proper fountains
of truth, the Word of God, written and unwritten,
declares any doctrine to be revealed, no difficulties of
human history can prevail against it. I have before
said : ' The pretentious historical criticism of these
days has prevailed, and will prevail, to undermine the
peace and the confidence, and even the faith of some.
But the city seated on a hill is still there, high and
out of reach. It cannot be hid, and is its own
evidence, anterior to its history, and independent of it.
Its history is to be learned of itself.' 'It is not there-
fore by criticism on past history, but by acts of faith
in the living voice of the Church at this hour, that
we can know the faith.' *

On these words of mine, Quirinus makes the fol-
lowing not very profound remark : ' The faith which
removes mountains will be equally ready — such is
clearly his meaning — to make away with the facts
of history. Whether any German Bishop will be
found to offer his countrymen these stones to digest,
* Pastoral, &c., 18G9, p. 125-

120 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

time will show.'* Time has shown, faster than
Quirinus looked for. The German Bishops at Fulda,
in their pastoral letter on the Council, speak as follows :
1 To maintain that either the one or the other of the
doctrines decided by the General Council is riot con-
tained in the Holy Scripture, and in the tradition of
the Church — those two sources of the Catholic faith —
or that they are even in opposition to the same, is a
first step, irreconcilable with the very first principles
of the Catholic Church, which leads to separation
from her communion. Wherefore, we hereby declare
that the present Vatican Council is a legitimate
General Council ; and, moreover, that this Council, as
little as any other General Council, has propounded or
formed a new doctrine at variance with the ancient
teaching, but has simply developed and thrown light
upon the old and faithfully-preserved truth contained
in the deposit of faith, and in opposition to the errors
of the day has proposed it expressly to the belief of
all faithful people; and, lastly, that these decrees
have received a binding power on all the faithful by
the fact of their final publication by the Supreme
Head of the Church in solemn form at the Public
Session.' f

Let us, then, go on to examine the relation of
history to faith.

The objection from history has been stated in these
words : ' There are grave difficulties, from the words
and acts of the Fathers of the Church, from the
genuine documents of history, and from the doctrine

* Letters from Rome, &c. by Quirinus, second series, p. 348-9.
j Times, Sept. 22, 1870.

SCIENTIFIC HISTOKY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 121

of the Church itself, which must be altogether solved,
before the doctrine of the infallibility of the Roman
Pontiff can be proposed to the faithful as a doctrine
revealed "by God.'

Are we to understand from this that the words and
acts of the Fathers, and the documents of human
history, constitute the Rule of Faith, or that the Rule
of Faith depends upon them, and is either more or
less certain as it agrees or disagrees with them? or,
in other words, that the rule of faith is to be tested
by history, not history by the rule of faith ? If this
be so, then they who so argue lay down as a theo-
logical principle that the doctrinal authority of the
Church, and therefore the certainty of dogma, depends,
if not altogether, at least in part, on human history.
From this it would follow that when critical or
scientific historians find, or suppose themselves to find,
a difficulty in the writings of the Fathers or other
human histories, the doctrines proposed by the Church
as of Divine revelation are to be called into doubt,
unless such difficulties can be solved. The gravity
of this objection is such, that the principle on which
it rests is undoubtedly either a doctrine of faith or a
heresy.

In order to determine whether it be the one or the
other, let us examine first what is the authority and
place of human history.

To do so surely and shortly, I will transcribe the
rules of Melchior Canus, which may be taken as the
doctrine of all theological Schools.

The eleventh chapter of his work ' De Locis Theo-
logicis,' is entitled cde Humanae Historiae Auctoritate.7
In it he lays down the following principles :

122 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

1. 'Excepting the sacred authors, no historian can
be certain, that is, sufficient to constitute a certain
faith in theological matter. As this is obvious and
manifest to every one, it has no need to be proved by
our arguments.

2. ' Historians of weight, and worthy of confidence,
as some without doubt have been, both in Ecclesi-
astical and in secular matters, furnish to a theologian,
a probable argument.

3. 4 If all approved historians of weight concur in
the same narrative of an event, then from their
authority a certain argument can be educed, so that
the dogmas of theology may be confirmed also by
reason.' *

Let us apply these rules to the case of Honorius,
and to the alleged historical difficulties. Is this
one in which 'all approved historians of weight
concur in the same narration of events?' In the
case of Honorius, it is well known that great dis-
crepancy prevails among historical critics. The his-
tories themselves are of doubtful interpretation.
But the Rule of Faith is the Divine tradition of
revelation proposed to us by the magisterium, or
doctrinal authority, of the Church. Against this, no
such historical difficulties can prevail. Into this
they cannot enter. They are excluded, as I have
said, by a prescription which has its origin in the
Divine institution of the Church. The revelation of
the faith, and the institution of the Church, were
both perfect and complete, not only before human
histories existed, but even before the inspired Scrip-

* Melchior Canus, Loci theol. lib. xi. c. 4.

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 123

tures were written. The Church itself is the Divine
witness, teacher, and judge, of the revelation entrusted
to it. There exists no other. There is no tribunal
to which appeal from the Church can lie. There is
no co-ordinate witness, teacher, or judge, who can
revise, or criticize, or test, the teaching of the Church.
It is sole and alone in the world. And to it may be
applied the words of St. Paul, as St. John Chrysos-
tom has applied them : 4 The spiritual man judgeth
all things and he himself is judged by no one.7 The
Ecclesia docens, or the pastors of the Church, with
their head, are a witness divinely sustained and
guided to guard and to declare the faith. They
were antecedent to history, and are independent
of it. The sources from which they draw their
testimony of the faith are not in human histories,
but in Apostolical tradition, in Scripture, in Creeds,
in the Liturgy, in the public worship and law of
the Church, in Councils: and in the interpretation
of all these things by the supreme authority of the
Church itself.

The Church has indeed a history. Its course and
its acts have been recorded by human hands. It has
its annals, like the empire of Rome or of Britain.
But its history is no more than its footprints in time,
which record indeed, but cause nothing and create
nothing.

The tradition of the Church may be historically
treated ; but between history and the tradition of the
Church there is a clear distinction. The school of
scientific historians, if I understand it, lays down
as a principle that history is tradition, and tradition

124 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

history : that they are one and the same thing under
two names. This seems to be the Trptbrov \[/£uoo£ of
their system; it is a tacit elimination of the super-
natural, and of the Divine authority of the Church.

The tradition of the Church is not human in its
origin, in its perpetuity, in its immutability. The
matter of that tradition is Divine. But history, ex-
cepting so far as it is contained in the tradition of
the Church, is not Divine but human, and human
in its mutability, uncertainty, and corruption. The
matter of it is human. Under the name 'tradition'
come two elements altogether Divine ; namely, that
which is handed down as the Word of God written
and unwritten, and the mode of handing it down,
which is the ' magisterium ' or teaching authority of
the Church. But against neither the one nor the
other of these things can human histories, written by
men not inspired by the Spirit of God, not seldom
inspired by any other than the Spirit of God, prevail;
because against the Church the gates of hell cannot
prevail. The visible Church itself is Divine tradition.
It is also the Divine depository, and the Divine
guardian of Faith. But this Divine tradition contains
both the 4 Ecclesia docens ' and the ' Ecclesia discens ; '
both infallible, the latter passively, the former pas-
sively and actively, by the perpetual assistance of the
Spirit of Truth. It contains also the Creed of the
Universal Church, the decrees of Pontiffs, the defi-
nitions of Councils, the common and constant doctrine
of the Church delivered by its living voice in all the
world, of which our Divine Lord said, 4 He that heareth
you, heareth Me/ *

* See Appendix, p. 187.

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 125

Now if this be so, of what weight or authority is
human history in matters of faith ?

For instance, the Vatican Council affirms that the
doctrine of the immutable stability of Peter and of his
successors in the faith, and therefore the infallibility
of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith and morals,
in virtue of a Divine assistance promised to St. Peter,
and in Peter to his successors, is a revealed truth.

What has human history to say to this declaration ?
Human history is neither the source nor the channel
of revelation.

Scientific history may, however, mean a scientific
handling of the Divine tradition and the authoritative
documents of the Church. But before these things
can be thus scientifically handled, they must be first
taken out of the hands of the Church by the hands of
the scientific critics. And this simply amounts to
saying : c You are the Catholic Church indeed, arid
possess these documents and histories of your own
past. But either you do not know the meaning of
them, because you are not scientific, or you will not
declare the real meaning of them, because you are
not honest. We are the men ; honesty and science is
with us, if it will not die with us. Hand over your
documents, the forged and the true; the forgeries
we will find out; the true we will interpret; and by
science we will prove that you have erred and led the
world into error ; and therefore that your claim to
be a Divine tradition, and to have a Divine authority,
is an imposture. The case of Honorius alone is
enough. You say that Pope Leo and Pope Agatho
interpreted the Councils of Constantinople so as to

326 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

show, that whatever faults of infirmity were in Hono-
rius, a doctrinal heretic he was not. We, by scientific
treatment of history, have proved that your con-
temporaneous Popes were wrong; and we are scien-
tifically right in declaring that Honorius was a
heretic, not in a large, but in a strict sense, not only
as a private person, but as a pope " ex cathedra:"
and therefore that the infallibility of the Pope is a
fable.'

But why should the school of scientific history pre-
vail over the immemorial tradition of the Church,
even in a matter of fact ?

And how can it prevail over the definition of the
Vatican Council, except by claiming to be infallible,
or denying the infallibility of the Catholic Church?

And here lies the true issue. My purpose has
been to bring out this one point, namely, that under
this pretext of scientific history lurks an assumption
which is purely heretical. It has already destroyed
the faith of some ; and will that of more. Our duty is
to expose it, and to put the faithful on their guard
against what I believe to be the last and most subtile
form of Protestantism. This school of error has
partly sprung up in Germany by contact with Pro-
testantism, and partly in England by the agency of
those who, being born in Protestantism, have entered
the Catholic Church, but have never been liberated
from certain erroneous habits of thought.

The first form of Protestantism was to appeal from
the Divine authority of the Church to the text of
Scripture : that is, from the interpretation of the Holy
Scriptures traditionally declared by the Church, to the

SCIENTIFIC HISTOKY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 127

interpretation of private judgment. This is the pure
Lutheran or Calvinistic Protestantism.

The next was, to appeal from the Divine authority
of the Church to the faith of the undivided Church
before the separation of the East and West. Such was
the Anglican Protestantism of Jewell and others.

The third was, to appeal from the Divine authority
of the Church to the consent of the Fathers, to the
canons of Councils, and the like. Such is the more
modern form of Anglicanism; of which I wish to
speak with all charity, for the sake of so many whom
I respect and love.

Thus far, we have to deal with those who are not
in communion with the Holy See.

But there has been growing up, both in Germany
and in England, a school, if I may so call it, not
numerous nor likely to have succession, which places
itself in constant antagonism to the authority of the
Church, and, to justify its attitude of antagonism,
appeals to 4 scientific history.' 'The Pope and the
Council/ by Janus, and the attacks on Honorius, are its
fruits. These were all avowedly written to prevent
the definition of the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff.
It was an attempt to bar the advance of the 'magis-
terium Ecclesia} ' by scientific history.

Now, before the definition of the Vatican Council,
the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was a doctrine
revealed by God, delivered by the universal and
constant tradition of the Church, recognised in (Ecu-
menical Councils, pre-supposed in the acts of the
Pontiffs in all ages, taught by all the Saints, defended
by every religious Order, and by every theological

128 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

school except one, and in that one disputed only by
a minority in number, and during one period of its
history; believed, at least implicitly, by all the faithful,
and therefore attested by the passive infallibility of
the Church in all ages and lands, with the partial and
transient limitations already expressed.

The doctrine was therefore already objectively de
fide, and also subjectively binding in conscience upon
all who knew it to be revealed.

The definition has added nothing to its intrinsic
certainty, for this is derived from Divine revelation.

It has added only the extrinsic certainty of uni-
versal promulgation by the Ecclesia docens, imposing
obligation upon all the faithful.

Hitherto, therefore, the authors of Janus, and the
like, who appealed to scientific history, appealed
indeed from the doctrinal authority of the Church in
a matter of revelation ; but they may be, so far as
God knows their good faith, protected by the plea
that the doctrine had not yet been promulgated by a
definition.

Nevertheless, the process of their opposition was
essentially heretical. It was an appeal from the
traditional doctrine of the Catholic Church, delivered
by its common and constant teaching, to history in-
terpreted by themselves.

It does not at all diminish the gravity of this act
to say that the appeal was not to mere human
history, nor to history written by enemies, but to
the acts of Councils, and to the documents of Eccle-
siastical tradition.

This makes the opposition more formal ; for it

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 129

amounts to an assumption that scientific history
knows the mind of the Church, and is better able
to interpret its acts, decrees, condemnations, and
documents, either by superiority of scientific criti-
cism, or by superiority of moral honesty, than the
Church itself.

But surely the Church best knows its own history,
and the true sense of its own acts and documents.

The Crown of England would make short work of
those who should scientifically interpret the unwritten
law, or the acts of Parliament, contrary to its judg-
ments.

Do modern critics suppose that the case of Honorius
is as new to the Church as it is to them, or that the
Church has not a traditional knowledge of the value
and bearing of the case upon the doctrines of faith ?

This, again, in non-Catholics would imply no more
than the ordinary want of knowledge as to the Divine
nature and office of the Church. In Catholics it
would imply, if not heresy, at least a heretical animus.

If the Church has prohibited, under pain of excom-
munication, any appeal from the Holy See to a future
General Council, certainly under the same censure it
would condemn an appeal from the Council of the
Vatican to the Councils of Constantinople inter-
preted by scientific history.

It is of faith that the Church alone can declare the
contents and the limits of revelation, and can alone
determine the extent of its own infallibility. And
as it alone can judge of the true sense and interpre-
tation of Holy Scripture, it alone can judge of the

130 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

true sense and interpretation of the acts of its own
Pontiffs and Councils.

Under the same head, therefore, and under the same
censure, come all appeals from the Divine authority of
the Church at this hour, under whatsoever pretext
or to whatsoever tribunal ; whether to Councils in
the future or the past, or to Scripture or the Fathers,
or to unauthentic interpretations of the acts of Coun-
cils, or to documents of human history.

This being so, it cannot be said that there exist
grave difficulties from the words and acts of the
Fathers, from the genuine documents of history, and
from the Catholic doctrine itself, which if not solved,
would render it impossible to propose to the faithful,
as a doctrine, the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff;
because it was contained, before definition, in the
universal and constant teaching of the Church as a
truth of revelation. Who is the competent judge to
declare whether such difficulties really exist? or, if
they exist, what is the value of them ; whether they
be grave or light, relevant or irrelevant? Surely, it
belongs to the Church to judge of these things.
They are so inseparably in contact with dogma, that
the deposit of faith cannot be guarded or expounded
without judging of them and pronouncing on them.
And it is passing strange if the Church should be
incompetent to judge of these things, and the scien-
tific historians alone competent ; that is, if the Church
should be fallible in dogmatic facts, and the scientific
historians infallible. What is this but Lutheranism
in history? In those that are without, this is con-

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 131

sistent: in Catholics, it would be not only incon-
sistent but a heresy.

The Council of the Vatican has with great precision
condemned this error in these words: 'Catholics can
have no just cause of calling into doubt the faith they
have received from the teaching authority (magis-
terium) of the Church, and of suspending their assent,
until they shall have completed a scientific demon-
stration of the truth of their faith.'*

Again, the Council lays down, in respect to 'sciences
properly so called, a principle which a fortiori
applies to ' historical science,' with signal impropriety
so called, by declaring c that every assertion contrary
to the truth of enlightened faith is false . . . Where-
fore all faithful Christians are not only forbidden to
defend as legitimate conclusions of science all such
opinions as are known to be contrary to the doctrine
of faith, especially if they have been condemned by
the Church, but are altogether bound to bold them
to be errors, which put on the fallacious appearance
of truth.' *

I have said that the treatment of history can only
be called science with signal impropriety; and for
the following reasons :

According to both philosophers and theologians,
science is the habit of the mind conversant with ne-
cessary truth ; that is, truth which admits of demon-
stration, and of the certainty which excludes the
possibility of its contradictory being true.

According to the scholastic philosophy, science is
defined as follows :

* Constitutio De Fide Catholica. Appendix, p. 191.

K 2

132 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Viewed subjectively, it is : the certain and evident
knowledge of the ultimate reasons or principles of
truth attained by reasoning/

Viewed objectively, it is ' the system of known
truths belonging to the same order as a whole, and
depending only upon one principle/

This is founded on the definitions of Aristotle. In
the sixth book of the Ethics, chapter iii. he says :
' From this it is evident what science is : to speak accu-
rately, and not to follow mere similitudes ; for we all
understand that what we know cannot be otherwise
than we know it. For whatsoever may or may not
be, as a practical question, is not known to be, or not
to be.'

Such also is the definition of St. Thomas. He says :
'Whatsoever truths are truly known as by certain
knowledge (ut certa scientia) are known by resolution
into their first principles, which of themselves are im-
mediately present to the intellect ... So that it is
impossible that the same thing should be the object
both of faith and of science, that is, because of the
obscurity of the principles of faith.' He nevertheless
calls theology a science. But Vasquez shows from
Cajetan that this is to be understood not simply but
relatively, non simpliciter, sed secundum quid. The
Thomists generally hold theology to be a science; but
imperfect in its kind.

Gregory of Valentia sums up the opinions of the
Schools, and concludes as follows : c That theology is
not science is taught by Durandus, Ockam, Gabriel,
and others, whose opinions I hold to be the truest.'
He adds : ' Though it be not a proper science, it is a

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 133

habit absolutely more perfect than any science; ' and
again : i Yet, nevertheless, by the best of rights, it may
be called a science, because absolutely it is a habit
more perfect than any science described by philoso-
phers.'*

Theology then may be called, though improprie, a
science. First, because it is a science, if not as to its
principles, at least as to its form, method, process, de-
velopment, and transmission. And secondly, because
though its principles are not evident, they are, in all the
higher regions of it, infallibly certain; and because
many of them are the necessary, eternal, and incor-
ruptible truths, which according to Aristotle, generate
science.

If then theology, which in certainty is next to science
properly so called, is to be called science only impro-
prie, notwithstanding the infallible certainty and im-
mutable nature of its ultimate principles, how can
human history, written by uninspired human authors,
transmitted by documents open to corruption, change,
and mutilation, without custody or security, except
the casual tradition of human testimony and human
criticism, open to perversion by infirmity and passion
of every kind, — how can such subject-matter yield
principles of certainty which excludes contradiction,
and ultimate truths immediate to the intellect and
evident in themselves?

If by historical science be meant an increased pre-
cision in examining evidence and in testing documents,
and in comparing narratives together, we will gladly
use the word by courtesy; but if more than this be

* Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost, p. 107-112.

134 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

meant, if a claim be set up for history, which is not
admitted even for theology, then in the name of truth,
both Divine and human, let the pretence be exposed.
And yet for many years these pretensions have been
steadily advancing. Many people have been partly
deceived, and partly intimidated by them. The con-
fident and compassionate tone in which certain writers
have treated all who differ from them, has won the
reward which often follows upon any signal au-
dacity. But when Catholics once understand that
this school among us elevates the certainty of history
above the certainty of faith, and appeals from the tra-
ditional doctrine of the Church to its own historical
science, their instincts will recoil from it as irrecon-
cilable with faith.

There is something happily inimitable in the con-
ceit of the words with which Janus opens his preface :

4 The immediate object of this work is to investi-
gate by the light of history those questions which we
are credibly informed are to be decided at the (Ecu-
menical Council already announced. And as we
have endeavoured to fulfil this task by direct reference
to original authorities, it is not, perhaps, too much to
hope that our labours will attract attention in scien-
tific circles ; and serve as a contribution to ecclesi-
astical history.7

Janus goes on to say, c But this work aims also at
something more than the mere calm and aimless ex-
hibition of historical events : the reader will readily
perceive that it has a far wider scope, and deals with
ecclesiastical politics; and in one word, that it is a

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE RULE OF FAITH. 135

pleading for very life, an appeal to the thinkers
among believing Christians,' &c.* •

We have here an unconscious confession. ' Janus '
is strictly an appeal from the light of faith to the
light of history, that is, from the supernatural to the
natural order ; a process, as I have said again and
again, consistent in Protestants and Rationalists : in
Catholics, simply heretical.

The direct reference to original authorities is, of
course, a prerogative of Janus. Who else but he
ever could, or would, or did, refer to the original
authorities ?

Again, it is a work addressed to scientific circles.
Lord Bacon describes a school of philosophers who,
when they come abroad, lift their hand in the attitude
of benediction, c with the look of those who pity men.'
Is science in the Catholic Church confined to c circles ? '
Is it an esoteric perfection which belongs to the
favoured and to the few who assemble in chambers and
secret places? Our Lord has warned us that the
science of God has a wider expanse of light. In truth,
this science is a modern Gnosticism, superior to
the Church, contemptuous of faith, and profoundly
egotistical. It appeals to the thinkers among believing
Christians : that is, to the intellectual few among the
herd of mere believers.

But finally the truth escapes : the aim of the book is
not merely calm and aimless. It deals with ecclesi-
astical politics- that is, it was an organised, combined,
and deliberate attempt to hinder the Vatican Council

* The Pope and the Council, by Janus. Preface, p. xiii.
London, 1869.

136 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

in its liberty of action, and in the same breath, before
the Council had assembled, to deny its (Ecumenicity on
the ground that it would not be free.

The book concludes as follows :

' That is quite enough — it means this, that what-
soever course the Synod may take, one quality can
never be predicated of it, namely, that is has been a
really free Council. Theologians and canonists de-
clare that without complete freedom, the decisions of
the Council are not binding, and the assembly is only
a pseudo-synod.' *

This was written in Germany during the summer
of last year. The English translation was published
by a Protestant bookseller in London in the month
of November. I bought the Italian translation in
the same month in Florence, on my way to the opening
of the Council. French and Spanish bishops told me,
on arriving, that they had translations in their own
language. And in Spain and Italy copies were sent
to the bishops through the channels of those Govern-
ments.

We have here the latest example of passionless
science.

Of the literary merits of the book, I will only say
first, that for its accuracy a fair account has been
taken in a pamphlet entitled 4A few Specimens of
Scientific History from Janus ; ' and for profoundness
that it is simply shallow, compared with Jewell's
' Defence of the Apology,' Barrow c On the Pope's
Supremacy,' Crakenthorp's 4 Vigilius Dormitans,'
Bramhall's c Schism Guarded,' Thorndike's ' Epilogue,'

* Ibid. p. 425.

SCIENTIFIC HISTORY AND THE EULE OF FAITH. 137

Brown's 'Fasciculus Eerum,' &c., to say nothing of
the Magdeburg Centuriators, or even Mosheim's or
Gieseler's Histories.

The old Protestant and especially the Anglican
anticatholic writers are solid, learned, and ponderous,
compared with Janus. They have also the force of
visible sincerity. Used against the Church from
without, their arguments are consistent and weighty ;
used by professing Catholics within the unity of the
Church, they are powerless in controversy, and
heretical in their effects and consequences.

I speak thus plainly, Eeverend and dear Brethren,
because you are charged with the cure of souls; and
in this country, where reading, speaking, writing has
no rule or limit, those committed to your charge will
be in daily temptation. They cannot close their
eyes ; and if they could, they cannot close their ears.
What they may refuse to read they cannot fail to hear.
It is the trial permitted for the purity and confirma-
tion of their faith. By your vigilant care they will
be what the Catholics of England, in the judgment
often expressed to me in other countries, already are —
and I would we were so in the degree in which others
believe — that is, firm, fearless, intelligent in faith, and
not ashamed to confess it before men. Never-
theless the trial is severe for many. And, as I have
said before, the Council will be 4 in ruinarn et in re-
surrectionem multorum.' Some who think them-
selves to stand will fall; and some, of whom we per-
haps have no hope, will rise to fill their place.
Therefore we must be faithful and fearless for the
truth.

138 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

The book c Janus ' warns us of two duties. The
one, to watch against this Gnostic inflation of scientific
conceit which is the animus of heresy; the other, to
warn all Catholics that to deny the (Ecumenicity or
the freedom of the Council which the Vicar of Christ
has already confirmed in all its acts hitherto complete,
or the obligation imposed upon the faithful by those
acts, is implicitly to deny the Infallibility of the
Church : and that to doubt, or to propagate doubts, of
its (Ecumenicity and freedom, or of the obligations of
its acts, is at. least the first step to that denial.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 139

CHAPTER V,

CONCLUSION. TRADITION OF ENGLAND. GREATER UNITY OF
FAITH RESULTING FROM THE DEFINITION.

IN an (Ecumenical Council, Bishops are witnesses of
the Faith of their respective Churches. Not indeed as
if they were representatives or delegates of their
flocks ; a theory strangely advanced by some writers
who counted up the population of what they were
pleased to call the greater cities, in order to give
weight to the testimony of their Bishops as against
that of others. In this they simply betrayed the fact
that they were resting upon the natural order, and
arguing, not on principles of faith, but of the political
world .

Bishops are witnesses, primarily and chiefly, not of
the subjective faith of their flocks, which may vary or
be obscured, but of the objective faith of the Church
committed to their trust, when by consecration they
became witnesses, doctors, and judges. They were
by consecration admitted to the Ecdesia docens, and
the Divine Tradition of the Faith was entrusted to
their custody. But this is one and the same in the
humblest Vicar Apostolic, and in the Bishop of the
most populous and imperial city in Christendom.

In the course of the discussions, testimony was
given to the unbroken tradition of the doctrine of
Papal Infallibility in Italy, Spain, Ireland, and many

140 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

other countries. It will not therefore be without its
use and interest, if I add briefly a few evidences of
the unbroken tradition of England as to the infalli-
bility of the Roman Pontiff. It would be out of
place in this Pastoral to do more than offer to you a
few passages ; but I would wish to stir up some one,
who has time for such research, to collect and publish
a complete catena of evidence from the writers before
and since the Reformation ; which will show that the
Gallicanism, or worse than Gallicanism, of Cisalpine
Clubs and Political Emancipationists was no more than
the momentary aberration of a few minds under the
stress of penal laws. They are abnormal instances in
the noble fidelity of the Catholics of England.

As to the Bishops and Doctors of the English Church
before the Reformation, I may first remind you of
the words of St. Anselm, St. Thomas of Canterbury,
and Bradwardine, three primates of England, given in
the Pastoral of last year. To these may be added
St. JElred of Rivaulx,* John of Salisbury,f Robert
Pullen,f Thomas of Evesham,§ Robert Grostete,||
Roger Bacon, ^f Scotus, ** Bachon,ff Holcot, JJ
Richard Ralph, §§ and Waldensis. |||| In these writers
the Primacy of the Pontiff, and the obligation, under

* Bibl. Max. Patrum, torn, xxiii. pp. 57, 58. Ed. Lugd. 1677.

f Polycrates, lib. vi. c. 24, p. 61. Ed. Giles.

J In Sentent. b. viii. c. iii.

§ In Vita Sti. Egwini, sect. vi.

|| Epp. 72 and 127. 11 Opus. c. xiv.

** In Sent. iv. dist. vi. 9, 8.

ft Proleg. in Lib. iv. Sentent. JJ In Lib. iv. Sentent.

§§ Summa in qnsestionibus Armenorum, lib. vii. c. 5.

(HI Doctrina Fidei, lib. ii. capp. 47, 48.

KESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 141

pain of sin, to obey his judgments and doctrines, is
laid down with a perfect unconsciousness that any
Catholic could dispute the Divine certainty of his
guidance. The Vatican definition has defined the
reason of this implicit faith, by declaring that in the
primacy there is a charisma which preserves the
supreme doctrinal authority of the Pontiff from error
in faith or morals.

But I leave to others to complete this part of the
subject. I will go on to the period of the Reforma-
tion.

The controversy against the authority of Rome
drew out more explicit statements from Sir Thomas
More and Cardinal Fisher.

More, writing against Luther, says, 'Judge, I pray
thee, reader, with what sincerity Father Tippler
treats this place of Jerome, when he (Jerome) says it
is enough for him if the Pope of Rome approve his
faith; that is, openly declaring that it cannot be
doubted that he is sound in faith who agrees with
that See; than which what could he more splendidly
say? Yet Father Tippler Luther and others so dis-
semble about this as to try to cloud the reader also
with darkness, and to lead away the minds of men
elsewhere, that they may not remember anything.'*

* ' Quaeso lector judica quam sincere pater Potator hunc locum
Hieronymi tractet : cum ille dicat, satis esse sibi si suam fidem
comprobaret papa Romanus : nimirum aperte significans, non du-
bitandum esse ilium recte sentire de fide, qui cum ilia sede con-
sen tiat : quo quid potuisset dicere magnificentius ? istud adeo
dissimulat pater Potator Lutherus ut etiam tenebras lectori conetur
offundere et animos hominum verbis alio, ne quid recordentur,
abducere.' — Morus, In Lutherum, lib. ii. cap. iv. p. 87. Louvain,
1566.

142 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Cardinal Fisher also, writing against Luther, says :
' One thing I know, that Augustine everywhere makes
Peter first and Prince of the Apostles, and Teacher
and Head of the rest, in whom also he says the rest
are contained, as in the head of any family the mul-
titude (of the family) are all contained.'* And
further he adds, 'Where else dost thou believe
the faith to abide, save in the Church of Christ?
UI," said Christ to Peter, "have prayed for thee
that thy faith fail not." The faith of Peter, do
not doubt it, will always abide in the succession of
Peter, which is the Church.' f This is precisely the
Vatican definition, c Romanum Pontificem ea infalli-
bilitate pollere, qua divinus Redemptor Ecclesiam
suam instructam esse voluit.'

Cardinal Pole, after describing the conduct of Peter
in the Council at Jerusalem, goes on to say, c The
same also the successors of Peter, following his faith,
have done in all other Councils ; in which is found
much more signally than in Peter's lifetime, of what
kind are the efforts of Satan, who desires to sift the
Church of God, and how great is the efficacy of this
special remedy in repressing them; namely, that which
Christ declared when he turned to Peter, in these

* * Unum scio, quod Augustinus ubique Petrum facit Primum
et Principem Apostolorum ac Magistrurn et Caput cseterorum, in
quo et cseteros contineri dicit, sicut in capite eujusvis familige re-
liqua comprehenditur multitude.' — Joannis Roffensis Confutatio
Errorum Lutheri, art. xxv. ad finem, in Rocaberti Biblioth. Pontif.
torn. xiv. p. 582.

f ' Ubi credis alibi manere fidem quam in Ecclesia Christi ? Ego,
inquit Christus ad Petrum, rogavi pro te ut non deficiat fides tua.
Petri fides ne dubita semper in successione Petri manebit, quse est
Ecclesia.' — Id. art. xxvii. ad fin. in Rocaberto, torn. xiv. p. 587.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 143

words, " And thou, being once converted, strengthen
thy brethren." For let all remedies be found which
at any time the Church has tried against the malice
of Satan, who at all times assails it with all kinds of
temptations ; none certainly will be ever found to be
compared with this, which is wont to be used in
General Councils ; namely, that all the Bishops of all
the Churches, as the brethren of Peter, be confirmed
by his successors, professors of the same faith.'*

In like manner, Harding, Jewel's antagonist, writes :
4 The Pope succeedeth Peter in authority and power.
For whereas the sheep of Christ continue to the
world's end, he is not wise that thinketh Christ to
have made a shepherd temporary or for a time over
His perpetual flock. To Peter He gave that He ob-
tained by His prayer made to the Father, that his
faith should not fail. Again, to him He gave grace
thus to perform, the performance whereof at him He
required, to wit, that he confirmed and strengthened
his brethren, wherefore the grace of stedfastness of
faith, and of confirming the wavering and doubtful

* ' Idem etiam Petri successores, fidem ejus secuti, fecere in
reliquis omnibus conciliis, in quibus multo illustrius quam vivo
Petro cornpertum est, et cujusmodi esset Satanse conatus Ecclesiam
Dei ciibrare expetentis, et quanta ad eos reprimendos extiterit vis
hujus singularis remedii, quod Christus ad Petrum sermonem con-
vertens verbis illis indicavit : Et tu aliquando con versus confirma
fratres tuos. Ut enim omnia remedia quaarantur quae ullo tempore
Ecclesia est experta contra Satanae malitiam nunquam non omni
tentationis genere earn aggredientis : nullum certe reperietur quod
cum hac comparari possit, quod in conciliis generalibus adhiberi est
solitum, ut singuli singularurn Ecclesiarum episcopi, tanquam Petri
fratres, confirmarentur per ejus successores eandem fidem profi-
tentes.' — Card. Polus, De Summo Pontifice, cap. iv. (Koccaberti,
Biblioth. Pontif, torn, xviii. p. 146.)

144 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

in faith, every Pope obtaineth of the Holy Ghost for
the benefit of the Church. And so the Pope, although
he may err by personal error in his own private
judgment as a man, and as a particular doctor in his
own opinion, yet as he is Pope, the successor of Peter,
the Vicar of Christ in earth, the shepherd of the
Universal Church, in public judgment, in deliberation
and definitive sentence, he never erreth, nor never
erred. For whensoever he ordaineth or determine th
anything by his high bishoply authority, intending
to bind Christian men to perform or believe the same,
he is always governed and holpen with the grace and
favour of the Holy Ghost. This is to Catholic
doctors a very ce'rtainty, though to such doughty
clerks as ye are it is but a matter of nothing and a
very trifling tale.'*

Campian, answering Whitaker, says, ' Nor, as you
slander us, do we depend on the voice of one man,
but rather on the Divine promise of Christ made to
Peter and his successors, for the stability of whose
faith He prayed to the Father. . . . " I have prayed
for thee, Peter," He said, " that thy faith fail not."
The fruit of which prayer, what follows plainly
enough shows, belongs not to Peter alone, but to his
successors also. . . . For since the Church was not
to become extinct with Peter, but to endure unto the
end of the world, the same stability in faith was even
more necessary to Peter's successors, the Roman
Pontiffs, in proportion as they were weaker than he,

* Confutation of a Book entitled i An Apology of the Church of
England,' by Thomas Harding, D.D., p. 335 a. Dedicated to the
Queen. Antwerp, 1565.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 145

and were to be assailed with mightier engines by
tyrants, heretics, and other impious men. As, there-
fore, Peter when converted, confirmed the Apostles
his brethren, the Pontiffs also must confirm their
brethren the rest of the Bishops/ Afterwards, he
says, ' Under his guidance they cannot err from the
right path of the faith.' *

These evidences are more than enough to show
what was the faith of the Church in England in the
sixteenth century, that is, in the controversies of the
Reformation. They show what was the faith, for
which the Catholics of England at that day stood,
and suffered .

In the seventeenth century, we may take Nicholas
Sanders as our first witness. He writes in his work
4 De Clavi David ' : ' But we freely declare, and what
in words we declare we prove by fact, that the suc-
cessor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome, in expounding
to the Bishops the faith of Christ, has never erred,
nor has ever either been the author of any heresy, or
has lent his authority to any heretic for the promul-
gation of heresy, 'f

Kellison, President of the College at Douai in
1605, writes as follows: 4Eor in two senses Peter
may be sayd to be the rocke of the Church : first, as
he is a particular man, and so if the Church had been

* Confutatio Eesporisionis G. Whitakeri, p. 44. Parisus 1582.

t ' At vero nos libere dicimus, et quod verbo dicirnus re ipsa
comprobamus, Petri successorem Episcopum Romanum in expo-
nenda Episcopis fide Christ! nunquam errasse, nunquam aut ullius
haeresis auctorem fuisse, aut alii haeretico ad promulgandum hse-
resim suam pra3buisse auctoritatem.' — Nicolas Sanderus, de Clavi
David, lib. v. cap. iv.

146 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

built upon him, it must have fallen with him ; se-
condly, as upon a publique person and supreme
Pastor, who is to have successors, to whom constancie
in faith is promised, by which they shal uphold the
Church: and so the Church dyeth not with Peter,
but keepeth her standing upon successors. And be-
cause Peter and his successors, by their indeficient
faith, in which as supreme pastors they shal never
erre, do uphold the Church, therefore the Fathers
alleaged sometimes say that the Church is builded on
Peter, sometimes on his faith, as it is the faith of the
supreme head : which in effect is al one. For if Peter
upholde the Church by his indeficient faith which he
teacheth, then Peter upholdeth the Church, as he
hath assured faith, and his faith upholdeth the Church,
not howsoever but as it is the faith of Peter, and the
supreme head, whose faith especially which he teacheth
out of his chaire (that is, not as a particular man only,
proposing his opinion ; but as a publique Doctor and
chiefs Pastor) defineth and commandeth what al
Christians ought to beleeve, shal never faile; and
consequently the Church which relyeth on his defi-
nition, though she may be shaken, yet shal never be
overthrowne.' *

In a work published by S. N,, Doctor of Divinity,
1634, we read : c The same is proved by all such texts
as convince that the head or chief Bishop of the
Church cannot err in defining matters of faith.
u Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired you that he
might winnow you as wheat, but I have prayed for

* A Survey of the New Religion, set forth by Matthew Kellison,
first book, chap. vi. p. 7-4. Doway, 1605.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 147

thee that thy faith may not fail." Here Christ
prayed not for all the Church, but in particular for
Peter, as all the words show: Simon — -for thee — thy
faith — thy brethren : also, whereas our Saviour began
to speak in the plural number, " Satan hath desired
to have you," &c., forthwith He changeth His manner
of speaking and saith, " but I have prayed for thee."
Further, He prayeth for him to whom He saith, " and
thou sometimes converted," which cannot agree to the
whole Church, except we will say the whole Church
to have been first perverted, which is many ways
untrue. But now that which Christ prayed for is
expressly that his faith should not fail, and then
seeing this prayer for Peter was for the good of the
Church, the Devil still desiring to winnow the faith-
ful, it thereof followeth that she never wanteth one
whose faith may not fail, by whom she may be con-
firmed.7*

Southwell, or Bacon, who wrote in 1638, affirms :
1 That the Eoman Pontiff, out of Council, is infallible
in his definitions.' He adds : ' It is clearly proved from
what is already said, he who is the foundation- stone
of the Church, actually and always infusing into it
firmness against the gates of hell and heresies : he
who is Pastor not of this or that place, but of the
whole fold : and therefore in all things necessary to
salvation is bound to feed, govern, and direct, cannot
err in judgment of faith. . . But the Supreme
Pontiff is such a Rock and Pastor, as has been mani-
festly proved; therefore he cannot err in judgment
of faith/ This he proves, among other evidence, by
* The Triple Cord, p. 72. 1634

L 2

148 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the promise of our Lord : ' I have prayed for thee,' &c.,
and adds, ' What was said to Peter as pastor was said
also to the Roman Pontiffs, as has been abundantly
proved.' *

Nor was this tradition broken, though the depres-
sion which followed the Revolution of 1688 reduced
the Catholics to silence. In the eighteenth century,
the following testimonies will suffice. More might,
no doubt, with ease be found; but for our present
purpose no more are needed. First, of Alban Butler,
who assuredly represents the English Catholics of his
times, we read as follows : 'It is evident from his
Epitome de sex prioribus conciliis cecumenicis in calce
tractatus de Incarnatione, that he had the highest
veneration for the Holy See, and for him who sits in
the chair of St. Peter; that he constantly held and
maintained the rights and singular prerogatives of
St. Peter and his successors in calling, presiding over,
and confirming, general or oecumenical councils ; the
Pope's superiority over the whole church and over
the whole college of bishops, and over a general
council ; the irreformability of his doctrinal decisions
in point of faith and morals ; his supreme power to
dispense (when there is cause) in the canons of
general councils ; in short, the plenitude of his au-
thority over the whole Church without exception or
limitation. Nihil excipitur ubi distinguitur nihil. S,
Bernard, 1. ii. de Consid. c. 8.'f What gives additional
force to this is, that Alban Butler not only held but

* Eegula viva, seu Analysis Fidei, p. 41. Antwerpias, 1638.
t An Account of the Life and Writings of the "Rev. Alban Bntler,
p. 16. London, 1799.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 149

taught these doctrines in his theological treatises : and
that we receive this testimony from the pen of Charles
Butler, who of all men is least to be suspected of
ultramontanism.

In the year 1790, when a certain number of
Catholics, weary of penal laws, fascinated by Parlia-
ment, and perhaps intimidated by the Protestant
ascendency, began to explain away Catholic doctrines,
and to describe themselves by a nomenclature which
I will not here repeat, the Rev. Charles Plowden
published a work, the very title of which is a witness
and an argument. It is called ' Considerations on
the Modern Opinion of the Fallibility of the Holy See
in the Decision of Dogmatical Questions.' He opens
his first chapter with these words : 4 Before the
Declaration of the Gallican Clergy in 1682, it was
the general persuasion of Roman Catholics that the
solemn decisions of the Holy See on matters of
dogmatical and moral import are infallible. Since
that epoch the contrary opinion is asserted in many
schools in France, it has been imported with other
French rarities into this kingdom, and it now appears
to be the prevailing system, especially among those
members of our Catholic clergy and laity who have
studied little of either.' He then most solidly
proves what in these Pastorals has been so often
asserted, that, with the exception of the modern
opinion of the local and transient Gallican School,
the universal and traditionary faith of the Church in
the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff has never been
obscured. Plowden then proceeds to censure the

150 TEE VATICAN COUNCIL.

oath which certain Catholics were at that time pro-
posing to themselves and others. He says : —

' The clause which regards Papal Infallibility is a
demonstration that the oath was not calculated to
accommodate the bulk of Roman Catholics, since the
very respectable number who believe the solemn and
canonical decrees of the Pope on matters of faith to
be irreformable can never conscientiously pronounce
it. If the interpreters of the oath tell us that the
framers of it did not intend to exclude the belief of
infallibility in dogmatical decisions, we must answer
them that the admission of such a tacit distinction
would justly lay us open to swearing to what we do
not believe. No infallibility and some infallibility will
always be contradictories. The Catholic public may
already know that I think the modern opinion of
papal fallibility in decisions of faith to be ill grounded
and dangerous, and it appears to me that the doctrine
of infallibility in these matters, though not decided,
might easily be proved to be that of the Catholic
Church and therefore true. It must not then be
renounced. The addition of personal in the address
does not remove the difficulty. For if the Supreme
Head of the Church be infallible in his solemn dog-
matical decisions, this infallibility attaches to his
person. It was promised and given to St. Peter, and
it subsists in his lawful successors. It does not
belong in solidum to the particular Church of Rome
as an aggregate of many individuals; it does not
belong to the chair or see of Rome as a thing distinct
from the Pope. The distinction between the sedes
and the sedens is a modern subterfuge of the Jan-

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 151

senists, unknown to antiquity, which always under-
stood the person of the chief Bishop, whether in
words they attribute inerrancy directly to him or
metaphorically to his see. If the Pope be then in-
fallible, he is personally infallible.'*

I will now add only two more witnesses who bore
their testimony in the last century, but lived on into
the present, Bishop Hay, who died in 1811, and
Bishop Milner, who died in 1826.

Bishop Hay, in his ' Sincere Christian,' writes as
follows : —

' Q. 27. On what grounds do these divines found
their opinion, who believe that the Pope himself,
when he speaks to all the faithful as head of the
Church, is infallible in what he teaches?

4 A. On several very strong reasons, both from
scripture, tradition, and reason.'

He then draws out these three fully and abun-
dantly ; and this done, he asks : —

' Q. 31. But what proofs do the others bring for
their opinion that the head of the Church is not
infallible?

'A. They bring not one text of Scripture to
prove it,' &c.

Lastly, Bishop Milner in his book called, ' Eccle-
siastical Democracy detected,' published in 1793,
after saying in the text, c The controversy of the
Pope's inerrancy is here entirely out of the question,'
adds the following note : i It is true I was educated
in the belief of this inerrancy; nor have I yet seen

• Observations on the Oath proposed to the English Roman
Catholics, by Charles Plowden, p. 43. London, 1790.

152 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

sufficient argument to change my opinion. . . . But
if the layman, who never fails to ridicule the doctrine
in question, is willing fairly to contest it, he knows
where to meet with an antagonist ready to engage
with him. Against one assertion however of this
writer, which insinuates the political danger resulting
from the doctrine of Papal Infallibility, I will hurl
defiance at him; nothing being more easy to show,
than that no greater danger can result to the State
from admitting the inerrancy of the Pope than from
admitting that of the Church itself.' *

I only hope we shall now hear no more that the
Catholics of England have not believed, or have
not been taught, this doctrine; nor that the 'Old
Catholics ' of England refuse to believe the new
opinions, and the like. We have heard too much
of this : and the honoured name of those who
through three hundred years of persecution have
kept the faith, has been too much dishonoured by im-
puting to them that they are not faithful to the
Martyrs, Confessors, and Doctors of England. The
faith of St. Anselm and St. Thomas, of Thomas More
and Cardinal Fisher, of Hay and Milner, is the faith
of the Catholics of England. Whoso departs from it
forfeits his share in the inheritance of fidelity they
have handed down.

I will now add a few words on the disastrous con-
sequences predicted from the Definition.

We were told that the Definition of the Infallibility
would alienate the fairest provinces of the Catholic
Church, divide the Church into parties, drive the

* Ecclesiastical Democracy detected, p. 98. London, 1793.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 153

scientific and independent into separation, and set
the reason of mankind against the superstitions of
Rome. We were told of learned professors, theolo-
gical faculties, entire universities, multitudes of laity,
hundreds of clergy, the flower of the episcopate, who
were prepared to protest as a body, and to secede.
There was to be a secession in France, in Germany,
in Austria, in Hungary. The 4 Old Catholics ' of
England would never hear of this new dogma, and
with difficulty could be made to hold their peace.
Day by day, these illusions have been sharply dis-
pelled; but not a word of acknowledgment is to be
heard. A professor is suspended a divinis in Ger-
many; a score or two of lay professors, led by a
handful whose names are already notorious, and a
hundred or so of laymen who, before the Council met,
began to protest against its acts, convoke a congress,
which ends in a gathering of some twenty persons.
These, with the alleged opposition of one Bishop, whose
name out of respect I do not write, as the allegation
has never yet been confirmed by his own word or
act, these are hitherto the adverse consequences of
the Definition.

On the other hand, the Bishops who, because they
opposed the Definition as inopportune, were calumni-
ously paraded as opposed to the doctrine of Infalli-
bility, at once began to publish their submission to the
acts of the Council. The greater part of the French
Bishops who were once in opposition, have explicitly
declared their adhesion. The German Bishops, meeting
again at Fulda, issued a Pastoral Letter, so valuable in
itself, that I have reprinted it in the Appendix.* It

* See Appendix, p. 225.

154 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

was signed by seventeen, including all the chief Bishops
of Germany. The others, if silent, cannot be doubted.
The leading Bishops of Austria and Hungary, who
may be taken as representing the Episcopates of
these countries, have in like manner declared them-
selves. The Clergy and the faithful of these king-
doms, with the rarest exceptions of an individual here
and there, are, as they have always been, of one mind
in accepting the definition with joy. Ireland has
spoken for itself, not only in many dioceses, and by its
Bishops, but by the Triduum, or Thanksgiving of
three days, held in Dublin with great solemnity and
with a concourse, as I am informed by direct corre-
spondence, such as was never seen before. Of Eng-
land I need say little. The Clergy of this diocese
have twice spoken for themselves; and the Clergy of
England and Scotland have given unequivocal witness
to their faith. As we hear so much and so often of
those among us who are called 4 the old Catholics/
that is, the sons of our martyrs and confessors; and
as their name is so lightly and officiously taken in
vain by those who desire to find or to make divisions
among us, you. will not need, but will nevertheless be
glad, to know, that both by word and by letter I have
received from the chief and foremost among them,
express assurance that what the Council has defined
they have always believed. It is but their old faith in
an explicit formula. Among the disappointments to
which our adversaries, I regret so to call them, but
truth must be spoken, have doomed themselves, none is
greater than this. They have laboured to believe and
to make others believe that the Catholic Church is

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 155

internally divided ; that the Council has revealed this
division; and that it is nowhere more patent than in
England. It is, I know, useless to contradict this
illusion. It is not founded in reason, and cannot by
reason be corrected. Prejudice and passion are deaf
and blind. Time and facts will dispel illusions, and
expose falsehoods. And to this slow but inexorable
cure we must leave them. It is no evidence of
division among us, if here and there a few indivi-
duals should fall away. I said before, the Council
will be in ruinam et in resurrectionem multorum. It
is a time of spiritual danger to many; especially to
those who live perpetually among adversaries, hearing
diatribes all day long against the Church, the Coun-
cil, and the Holy Father, reading anti-Catholic ac-
counts and comments upon Catholic doctrines, and
upon the words and acts of Catholic Bishops, and
always breathing, till they are unconscious of it, an
an ti- Catholic atmosphere.

St. Paul has foretold that c In the last days shall
come dangerous times,' * and c in the last times some
shall depart from the faith. 'f Those days seem
now to be upon us ; and individuals perhaps may
fall. But the fall of leaves and sprays and boughs
does not divide the Tree. You will know how to
deal with them in charity, patience, and firmness,
before you act on the Apostolic precept, ' A man
that is a heretic, after the first and second ad-
monition, avoid.' J You will use all the patience
of charity, but you will use also, if need be so, its

* 2 Tim. iii. 1. f 1 Tim. iv. 1.

t Tit. iii. 10.

156 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

just severity. In these clays, laxity is mistaken for
charity, and indifference to truth for love of souls.
This is not the spirit of the Apostle, who in the
excess of charity declared that he could desire ' to be
anathema from Christ ' for his brethren according to
the flesh, and yet for the love of souls could say,
CI would they were even cut off, who trouble you;' *
because the purity of the faith is vital to the sal-
vation of souls, and the salvation of the flock must be
preferred to the salvation of a few.

I will touch but one other topic, and then make an
end. The same prophets who foretold disastrous con-
sequences from the definition, are now foretelling the
downfall of the Temporal Power. Day by day, we
hear and read contemptuous censures of the obstinacy
of Pius the Ninth, who has ruined himself by his Non
possumus, and sealed his downfall by the definition
of his own infallibility. I do not hesitate to say, that
if what is now happening had been caused by the
definition, which is not the fact, yet any external
trials would be better than an internal conflict arising
from a contradiction of revealed truth. Gold may be
bought too dear : but truth cannot.

Perhaps we ought not to wonder that the Protestant
and anti-Catholic world should persist in declaring
that Rome, by the definition of the Infallibility, has
altered its relations to the world; or, as I have lately
read, 4 disgusted all the civil governments of Europe.'
They do not know, or are willingly ignorant, that the
doctrine of the Infallibility wras as much the doctrine
of the Church before as after the definition. The
* Gal. v. 12.

11ESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 157

definition only declares it to be revealed by God. The
relations of Rome to the Civil Powers are therefore
precisely what they were before. If the Civil Powers
are disgusted, it is only because the (Ecumenical
Council declined to swerve from its duty in com-
pliance to their dictation ; or because they can no
longer affect to disbelieve that the Infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff is the true and traditional doctrine of
the Catholic Church. We are called superstitious,
because we do not believe in the downfall of the
Temporal Power ; and obstinate, because we will not
recognise the right of Italy to invade the Patrimony
of the Church. Our superstition consists in this.
In the history of the Church the Temporal Power
has been suppressed, as the phrase is, over and over
again. The first Napoleon suppressed it twice. The
Triumvirate suppressed it in 1848. There is nothing
new under the sun. The thing that has been, is
the thing that shall be. We do not believe in the
perpetuity of anything but the Church; nor in the
finality of anything but justice. Sacrilege carries the
seeds of its own dissolution. A robbery so unjust
cannot endure. When or how it shall be chastised we
know not : but the day of reckoning is not less sure for
that. Of one thing there can be no doubt ; the nations
which have conspired to dethrone the Vicar of Christ
will, for that sin, be scourged. They will, moreover,
scourge one another and themselves. The people
that has the chief share in the sin, will have the
heaviest share in the punishment. We are therefore
in no way moved. If it be God's will that His
Church should suffer persecution, it will be thereby

158 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

purified; but the persecutors will fall one by one.
Koine has seen the map of Europe made over and
over again ; but Rome remains changeless. It will
see out the present dynasties of conquered and con-
queror : suffering, it may be, but indefectible.

I have already said, that the definition was made
on the eighteenth of July, and war on the nineteenth.
Since that date, a crowd of events have hurried to their
fulfilment. The French Empire has passed away.
Rome is occupied by the armies of Italy. The peace
of Europe is broken : never again, it may be, to be
restored, till the scourges of war have gone their
circuit among the nations. A period of storm has
set in, and the rising waters of a flood may be seen
approaching. If a time of trial for the Church is at
hand, a time of ruin and desolation to all countries
in Europe will come with it. The Church may suffer,
but cannot die ; the dynasties and civil societies of
Europe may not only suffer but be swept away.
The Head of the Church, be he where he may, in
Rome or in exile, free or in bondage, will be all that
the Council of the Vatican has defined, supreme in
jurisdiction, infallible in faith. Go where he may,
the faithful throughout the world will see in him the
likeness of His Divine Master, both in authority and
in doctrine. The Council has thus made provision
for the Church in its time of trial, when, it may be,
not only (Ecumenical Councils cannot be held, but
even the ordinary administration of ecclesiastical
government and consultation may be hardly pos-
sible.

Peter's bark is ready for the storm. All that is

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 159

needful is already on board. Past ages were wild
and perilous, but the future bids fair to exceed them
in violence, as a hurricane exceeds an ordinary storm.
The times of the Council of Trent were tempestuous :
but for. these three hundred years the licence and the
violence of free thought, free speech, and a free press
which spares nothing human or divine, have been
accumulating in volume and intensity. All this
burst upon the Council of the Vatican. And in the
midst of this, the Vicar of Jesus Christ, abandoned
by all powers of the once Christian world, stands
alone, weak but invincible, the supreme judge and
infallible teacher of men. The Church has therefore
its provision for faith and truth, unity and order.
The floods may come, the rain descend, and the
winds blow and beat upon it, but it cannot fall,
because it is founded upon Peter. But what security
has the Christian world? Without helm, chart, or
light, it has launched itself into the falls of revolu-
tion. There is not a monarchy that is not threatened.
In Spain and France, monarchy is already over-
thrown. The hated Syllabus will have its justifica-
tion. The Syllabus which condemned Atheism and
revolution would have saved society. But men would
not. They are dissolving the temporal power of the
Vicar of Christ. And why do they dissolve it? 'Be-
cause governments are no longer Christian. The
temporal power had no sphere, and therefore no
manifestation, before the world was Christian. What
matter will it have for its temporal power, when
the world has ceased to be Christian? For what is
the temporal power, but the condition of peaceful

160 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

independence and supreme direction over all Chris-
tians, and all Christian societies, inherent in the
office of Vicar of Christ, and head of the Christian
Church? When the Civil powers became Christian,
faith and obedience restrained them from casting
so much as a shadow of human sovereignty over
the Vicar of the Son of God. They who attempt it
now will do it at their peril.

The Church of God cannot be bound, and its
liberty is in its head. The liberty of conscience and
of faith, since the Church entered into peace, have
been secured in his independence.

For a thousand years his independence, which is
sovereignty, has been secured by the providence of
God in the temporal power over Rome : the narrow
sphere of his exemption from all civil subjection. But
men are nowadays wiser than God, and would unmake
and mend His works. They are therefore dissolving
the temporal power as He has fashioned it ; and in so
doing, they are striking out the keystone of the arch
which hangs over their own heads. This done, the
natural society of the world will still subsist, but
the Christian world will be no more. One thing
is certain; let all the Civil powers of this world in
turn, or all together, claim the Vicar of Jesus Christ
as their subject, a subject he will never be. The
Non possumus is not only immutable, but invincible.
The infallible head of an infallible Church cannot
depend on the sovereignty of man. The Council of
the Vatican has brought out this truth with the
evidence of light. The world may despise and fight
against it, but the Church of God will believe and
act upon this law of divine faith.

RESULT OF THE DEFINITION. 161

The peoples of the world will hear him gladly; but
the rulers see in him a superior, and will not brook
it. They cannot subdue him, and they will not be
subject to his voice. They are therefore in perpetual
conflict with him. But who ever fought against
him, and has prospered? Kings have carried him
captive, and princes have betrayed him ; but, one by
one, they have passed away, and he still abides.
Their end has been so tragically explicit that all
men may read its meaning. And yet kings and
princes will not learn, nor be wise. They rush
against the rock, and perish. The world sees their
ruin, Iput will not see the reason. The faithful read in
the ruin of all who lay hands on the Vicar of Christ
the warning of the Psalmist, c Nolite tangere Christos
meos ; ' and of our Lord Himself, ' Whosoever shall
fall on this stone, shall be broken, but on whomsoever
it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.' *

I remain, reverend and dear Brethren,

Your affectionate Servant in Christ,

^ HENRY EDWARD,

Archbishop of Westminster.
Feast of S. Edward the Confessor.

* St. Matth. xxi. 44.

APPENDIX.

POSTULATUM OF THE BISHOPS FOR THE
DEFINITION OF THE INFALLIBILITY.

SACRO CONCILIO OECUMENICO VATICANO.

A Sacra Oecumenica Synodo Yaticana infrascripti Patres hu-
millime instanterque flagitant, ut apertis, omnemque dubitandi
locum excludentibus verbis sancire velit supremam, ideoque
ab errore immunem esse Romani Pontificis auctoritatem, quum
in rebus fidei et morum ea statuit ac praecipit, quae ab omnibus
christifidelibus credenda et tenenda, quaeve reiicienda et dam-
nanda sint.

RATIONES OB QUAS HAEC PEOPOSITIO OPPORTUNA ET NECESSARIA

CENSETUR.

Romani Pontificis, beati Petri Apostoli successoris, in univer-
sam Christi Ecclesiam iurisdictionis, adeoque etiam supremi
magisterii primatus in sacris Scripturis aperte docetur.

Universalis et constans Ecclesiae traditio turn factis turn sanc-
torum Patrum efiatis, turn plurimorum Conciliorum, etiam oecu-
menicorum, et agendi et loquendi ratione docet, Romani Pontificis
iudicia de fidei morumque doctrina irreformabilia esse.

Consentientibus Graecis et Latinis, in Concilio II Lugdunensi
admissa professio fidei est, in qua declaratur : ' Subortas de fide
controversias debere Romani Pontificis iudicio definiri.' In
Morentina itidem oecumenica Synodo definitum est : * Romanum
Pontificem esse verum Christi Vicarium, totiusque Ecclesiae
caput, et omnium christianorum patrem et doctorem ; et ipsi in
beato Petro pascendi, regendi ac gubernandi universalem Eccle-

M 2

164 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

siam a Domino nostro lesu Christo plenam potestatem traditaxn
esse.' Ipsa quoque sana ratio docet, neminem stare posse in fidei
communione cum Ecclesia catholica, qui eius capiti non consentiat,
quum ne cogitatione quidem Ecclesiam a suo capite separare
liceat.

Attamen fuerunt atque adhucdum sunt, qui, catholicorum
nomine gloriantes, eoque etiam ad infirmorum in fide perniciem
abutentes, docere praesumant, earn sufficere submissionem erga
Romani Pontificis auctoritatem, qua eius de fide moribusque
decreta obsequioso, ut aiunt, silentio, sine interno mentis assensu,
vel provisorie tantum, usquedum de Ecclesiae assensu vel dissensu
constiterit, suscipiantur.

Hacce porro perversa doctrina Romani Pontificis auctoritatem
subverti, fidei unitatem dissipari, erroribus campum amplissimum
aperiri, tempusque late serpendi tribui, nemo non videt.

Quare Episcopi, catnolicae veritatis custodes et vindices, his
potissimum temporibus connisi sunt, ut supremam Apostolicae
Sedis docendi auctoritatem synodalibus praesertim decretis et
communibus testimoniis tuerentur.*

* 1. Concilium provinciale Coloniense, anno 1860 celebratum, cui, praeter
eminentissimum Cardinalem et Archiepiscopum Coloniensem, loannem de
Geissel, quinque subscripserunt Episcopi, diserte docet: 'Ipse (Komanus
Pontifex) est omnium Christianorum pater et doctor, cuius in fidei quaes-
tionibus per se irreformabile est indicium.'

2. Episcopi in Concilio provincial! Ultraiectensi anno 1865 congregati aper-
tissime edicunt : ' (Romani Pontificis) indicium in iis, quae ad fidem moresque
spectant, infallibile esse, indubitanter retinemus.'

3. Concilium provinciale Colocense, anno 1860 celebratum, haec statuit:
c Quemadmodum Petrus erat . . . doctrinae fidei magister irrefragabilis, pro
quo ipse Dominus rogavit, ut non deficeret fides eius . . . ; pari modo legitimi
eius in cathedrae Eomanae culmine successores . . . depositum fidei summo
et irrefragabili oraculo custodiunt . . . Unde propositiones cleri gallicani
anno 1682 editas, quas iam piae memoriae Georgius Archiepiscopus Strigo-
niensis una cum ceteris Hungariae Praesulibus eodem adhuc anno publice
proscripsit, itidem reiicimus, proscribimus, atque cunctis Provinciae huhis
fidelibus interdicimus, ne eas legere vel tenere, multo minus docere auderent.'

4. Concilium plenarium Bcdtimorense, anno 1866 coactum, in decretis,
quibus 44 Archiepiscopi et Episcopi subscripserunt, inter alia haec docet :
'Viva et infallibilis auctoritas in ea tantum viget Ecclesia, quae a Christo
Domino supra Petrum, totius Ecclesiae caput, principem et pastorem, cuius
fidem nunquam defecturam promisit, aedificata, suos legitimos semper habet
Pontifices, sine intermissione ab ipso Petro ducentes originem, in eius cathedra
collocatos, et eiusdem etiam doctrinae, dignitatis, honoris et potestatis haeredes
et vindices. Et quoniam ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia, ac Petrus per Romanurn
Pontificem loquitur et semper in suis successoribus vivit et iudicium exercet,
ac praestat quaerentibus fidei veritatem ; idcirco divina eloquia eo plane sensu

APPENDIX. 165

Quo evidentins vero catholica veritas praedicabatur, eo vehe-
mentius, tarn libellis quam ephemeridibus, nuperrime impugnata
est, ut catholicus populus contra sanam doctrinam commoveretur,
ipsaque Yaticana Synodus ab ea proclamanda absterreretur.

Quare, si an tea de opportnnitate istius doctrinae in hoc Oecu-
menico Concilio pronuntiandae a pluribus dubitari adhuc potuit,
mine earn defmire necessarmm prorsus videtur. Catholica enim
doctrina iisdem plane argumentis denuo impetitur, quibus olim
homines, proprio iudicio condemnati, adversus earn utebantur ;
quibus, si urgeantur, ipse Romani Pontificis primatus, Ecclesiae-
que infallibilitas pessumdatur ; et quibus saepe deterrima convicia
contra Apostolicam Sedem admiscentur. Immo acerbissimi
catholicae doctrinae impugnatores, licet catholicos se dicant,
blaterare non erubescunt, Florentinam Synodum, supremam
Romani Pontificis auctoritatem luculentissime profitentem, oecu-
menicam non fuisse.

Si igitur Concilium Vaticanum, adeo provocatum, taceret et
catholicae doctrinae testimonium dare negligeret, tune catholicus

sunt accipienda, quae tenuit ac tenet haec Eomana beatissimi Petri cathedra,
quae omnium Ecclesiarum mater et magistra, fidem a Christo Domino traditam
integram inviolatamque semper servavit, eamque fideles edocuit, omnibus
ostendens salutis semitam et incorruptae veritatis doctrinam.

5. Concilium primum provinciale Westmonasteriense, anno 1852 habitum,
profitetur : ' Cum Dominus noster adhortetur dicens : Attendite ad petram,
unde excisi estis ; atteudite ad Abraham, patrem vestrum : aequum est, nos,
qui immediate ab Apostolica Sede fidem, sacerdotium, veramque religionem
accepimus, eidem plus ceteris amoris et observantiae vinculis adstringi. Fun-
damentum igitur verae et orthodoxae fidei ponimus, quod Dominus noster lesus
Christus ponere wluit inconcussum, scilicet Petri cathedram, totius orbis
magistram et matrem, S. Ttomanam Ecclesiam. Quidquid ab ipsa semel definitum
est, eo ipso ratum et cerium tenemus ; ipsius traditiones, ritus, pios usus et
omnes apostolicas constitutiones, disciplinam respicientes, toto corde amplec-
timur et veneramur. Summo denique Pontifici obedientiam et reverentiam, ut
Christi Vicario, ex animo profitemur, eique arctissime in catholica com-
munione adhaeremus.'

6. Quingenti prope Episcopi, ex toto terrarum orbe ad agenda solemnia
saccidaria Martyrii Sanctorum Petri et Pauli anno 1867 in hac alma Urbe
congregati, minime dubitarunt, Supremum Pontificem Pium IX hisce alloqui
verbis : ' Petrum per os Pii locutum fuisse credentes, quae ad custodiendum
depositum a Te dicta, confirmata, prolata sunt, nos quoque dieimus, confir-
mamus, annunciamus, unoque ore atque animo reiicimus omnia, quae divinae
fidei, saluti animarum, ipsi societatis humanae bono adversa, Tu ipse repro-
banda ac reiicienda iudicasti. Firmum enim menti nostrae est, alteque de-
fixum, quod Patres Florentini in decreto unionis definierunt : Eomanum
Pontificem Christi Vicarium, totius Ecclesiae f>api\t pt omnium Christianorura
Patrem et Doctorem exsistere.'

166 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

popnlus de vera doctrina reapse dubitare inciperet, neoterici
autem. gloriantes assererent, Concilium ob argurnenta ab ipsis
allata siluisse. Quinimmo silentio hoc semper abuterentur, ut
Apostolicae Sedis iudiciis et decretis circa fidem et mores palam
obedientiam negarent, sub praetextu quod Romanus Pontifex in
eiusmodi iudiciis falli potuerit.

Publicum itaque rei christianae bonum postulare videtur, ut
Sacrosanctum Concilium Yaticanum, Florentinum decretum de
Romano Pontifice denuo profitens et uberius explicans, apertis,
omnemque dubitandi locum praecludentibus verbis sancire velit
supremam, ideoque ab errore immunem esse eiusdem Romani
Pontificis auctoritatem, quum in rebus fidei et morum ea statuit
ac praecipit, quae ab omnibus christifidelibus credenda et tenenda,
quaeve reiicienda et damnanda sint.

Non desunt quidem qui existiment, a catholica hac veritate
sancienda abstinendum esse, ne schismatici atque haeretici longius
ab Ecclesia arceantur. Sed in primis catholicus populus ius
habet, ut ab Oecumenica Synodo doceatur, quid in re tarn gravi,
et tarn improbe nuper impugnata, credendum sit, ne simplices et
incautos multorum animos perniciosus error tandem corrumpat.
Idcirco etiam Lugdunenses et Tridentini Patres rectam doctrinam
stabiliendam esse censuerunt, etsi schismatici et haeretici offeii-
derentur. Qui si sincera mente veritatem quaeranfc, non abster-
rebuntur sed allicientur, dum ipsis ostenditur, quo potissimum
fundamento catholicae Ecclesiae unitas et firmitas nitatur. Si
qui autem, vera doctrina ab Oecumenico Concilio definita, ab
Ecclesia deficerent, hi riumero pauci et iamdudum in fide naufragi
sunt, praetextum solummodo quaerentes, quo externa etiam
actione ab Ecclesia se eximant, quam inter no sensu iam deseruisse
palam ostendunt. Hi sunt, qui catholicum populum continuo
turbare non abhorruerunt, et a quorum insidiis Vaticana Synodus
fideles Ecclesiae filios tueri debebit. Catholicus enimvero populus,
semper edoctus et assuetus, Apostolicis Romani Pontificis decretis
plenissimum mentis et oris obsequium exhibere, Vaticani Concilii
sententiam de eiusdem suprema et ab errore immuni auctoritate
laeto fidelique animo excipiet.

APPENDIX. 167

TRANSLATION OF THE POSTULATUM FOR
THE DEFINITION.

TO THE HOLY (ECUMENICAL VATICAN COUNCIL.

The undersigned Fathers humbly and earnestly beg the holy
CEcumenical Council of the Vatican to define clearly, and in
words that cannot be mistaken, that the authority of the Roman
Pontiff is supreme, and, therefore, exempt from error, when in
matters of faith and morals he declares and defines what is to be
believed and held, and what to be rejected and condemned, by all
the faithful.

REASONS FOE WHICH THIS DEFINITION is THOUGHT OPPORTUNE
AND NECESSARY.

The Sacred Scriptures plainly teach the Primacy of jurisdic-
tion of the Roman Pontiff, the Successor of St. Peter, over the
whole Church of Christ, and, therefore, also his Primacy of su-
preme teaching authority.

The universal and constant tradition of the Church, as seen
both in facts and in the teaching of the Fathers, as well as in
the manner of acting and speaking adopted by many Councils,
some of which were CEcumenical, teaches us that the judgments
of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith and morals are irre-
formable.

In the Second Council of Lyons, with the consent of both
Greeks and Latins, a profession of faith was agreed upon, which
declares : * When controversies in matters of faith arise, they
must be settled by the decision of the Roman Pontiff.' Moreover,
in the CEcumenical Synod of Florence, it was defined that ' the
Roman Pontiff is Christ's true Vicar, the Head of the whole
Church, and Father and Teacher of all Christians ; and that to
him, in blessed Peter, was given by Jesus Christ the plenitude of
power to rule and govern the universal Church.' Sound reason,
too, teaches us that no one can remain in communion of faith
with the Catholic Church who is not of one mind with its head,
since the Church cannot be separated from its head even in
thought.

Yet some have been found, and are even now to be found,
who, boasting of the name of Catholic, and using that name to
the ruin of those weak in faith, are bold enough to teach, that
sufficient submission is yielded to the authority of the Roman

168 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Pontiff, if we receive his decrees in matters of faith and morals
with an obsequious silence, as it is termed, without yielding in-
ternal assent, or, at most, with a provisional assent, until the
approval or disapproval of the Church has been made known.
Anyone can see that by this perverse doctrine the authority of
the Roman Pontiff is overturned, all unity of faith dissolved, a
wide field opened to errors, and leisure afforded for spreading
them far and wide.

Wherefore the Bishops, the guardians and protectors of Ca-
tholic truth, have endeavoured, especially now-a-days, to defend
in their Synodal decrees, and by their united testimony, the
supreme authority of the Apostolic See.*

But the more clearly Catholic truth has been declared, the
more vehemently has it been attacked both in books and in
newspapers, for the purpose of exciting Catholics against sound
doctrine, and preventing the Council of the Vatican from defin-
ing it.

Though, then, in times past many might have doubted the
opportuneness of declaring this doctrine in the present (Ecu-
menical Council, it would seem now to be absolutely necessary
to define it. For Catholic doctrine is now once more assailed
by those same arguments which men, condemned by their own
conscience, used against it in old times ; arguments which, if
carried to their ultimate consequences, would bring to the ground
the very Primacy of the Roman Pontiff and the infallibility of
the Church itself: and to which, also, is frequently added, the
most violent abuse of the Apostolic See. Nay, more ; the most
bitter assailants of Catholic doctrine, though calling themselves
Catholics, are not ashamed to assert that the Synod of Florence,
which so clearly declares the supreme authority of the Roman
Pontiff, was not (Ecumenical.

If then the Council of the Vatican, being thus challenged, were
to be silent, and omit to give testimony to the Catholic doctrine on
this point, then Catholics would, in fact, begin to doubt the true
doctrine, and the novelty-mongers would triumphantly assert
that the Council had been silenced by the arguments brought
forward by them. They would, moreover, abuse this silence on
every occasion, and openly deny the obedience due to the judg-
ments and decrees of the Apostolic See in matters of faith and
morals, under pretext that the judgment of the Roman Pontiff
is fallible on such points.

* Many specimens of this testimony are collected in the following Appendix
to the Postulatum.

AITENDIX. 169

Wherefore the public good of Christianity seems to require,
that the holy Council of the Vatican, professing once again, and
explaining more fully, the Florentine decree, should define clearly
and in words that can admit of no doubt, that the authority of
the Roman Pontiff is supreme, and, therefore, exempt from error,
when in matters of faith and morals he decrees and ordains what
is to be believed and held by all the faithful of Christ, and what
to be rejected and condemned by them.

There are, indeed, some who think that this Catholic truth
should not be defined, lest schismatics and heretics should be
repelled yet further from the Church. But, above all other con-
siderations, Catholics have a right to be taught by the GEcu-
menical Council what they are to believe in so weighty a matter,
and one which has been of late so iniquitously attacked; lest
this pernicious error should in the end infect simple minds, and
the masses of people unawares. Hence it was that the Fathers
of Lyons and of Trent deemed themselves bound to establish
the doctrine of the truth, notwithstanding the offence that might
be taken by schismatics and heretics. For if these seek the
truth in sincerity, they will not be repelled, but, on the contrary,
drawn towards us, when they see on what foundations the
unity and strength of the Catholic Church chiefly repose. But
^hould any leave the Church in consequence of the true doctrine
being defined by the (Ecumenical Council, these will be few in
number, and such as have already suffered shipwreck in the
faith ; such as are only seeking a pretext to abandon that Church
by an overt act, which they plainly show they have deserted
already in heart. These are they who have never shrunk from
disturbing our Catholic people ; and from the snares of such
men the Council of the Vatican ought to protect the faithful
children of the Church. For all true Catholics, taught and
accustomed to render the fullest obedience both of thought and
word to the Apostolic decrees of the Roman Pontiff, will receive
with joyful and devoted hearts the definition of the Council of
the Vatican concerning his supreme and infallible authority.

APPENDIX.

DECISIONS OF PKOVINCIAL SYNODS RECENTLY HELD, SHOWING THE
COMMON OPINION OF BISHOPS CONCERNING THE SUPREME AND
INFALLIBLE AUTHORITY OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF IN MATTERS OF
FAITH AND MORALS.

1. The Provincial Council held at Cologne in 1860, to which,
in addition to his Eminence Cardinal Geissel, Archbishop of

170 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Cologne, five Bishops subscribed, expressly declares : ' He (the
Roman Pontiff) is the father and teacher of all Christians, whose
judgment in questions of faith is " per se " unalterable.'

2. The Bishops assembled in the Provincial Council, held at
Utrecht in 1865, most openly assert : ' We unhesitatingly hold
that the judgment of the Roman Pontiff in matters which refer
to faith and morals is infallible'

3. The Provincial Council of Prague * in 1860, to which his
Eminence Cardinal Archbishop Frederic de Schwarzenberg and
four other Bishops subscribed, under the heading, ' On the
Primacy of the Roman Pontiff,' decreed as follows : ' We re-
ject, moreover, the error of those who pretend that the Church
can exist anywhere without being joined in bonds of union with
the Church of Rome, in which the tradition which has been
handed down by the Apostles, has been preserved by those who
are in every part.' (S. Irenseus Adv. Seer. 1. 3, c. 3, n. 2.)

* We know that no one who is not joined to the Head, can be
considered as a member of the Body of the Church which Christ
founded on Peter and established on his authority. Let all then
prefer to confess with us and with the multitude of orthodox
believers spread over the whole world, the Headship of the
Roman Church and the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff; let
them, as is fitting, with us, reverence and honour with dutiful
affection our Most Holy Father Pius IX., by God's Providence
Pope, the lawful Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, the
Vicar of Christ on earth, the Chief Teacher of Faith, and Pilot
of the Ship of Christ, to whom the most exact obedience and in-
ternal assent is due from all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ.
We declare and teach, That this authority of the Roman Pontiff
comes from Christ our Lord, and that consequently it is dependent
upon no power or favour of men, and remains unimpaired in all
times, even in the most bitter persecutions which the Church of
Rome has suffered, as was the case during the imprisonment and
martyrdom of blessed Peter.'

4. The Provincial Council of Kalocza, held in 1860, declared :
* That as Peter was . . . the irrefutable teacher of the doctrines
of faith, for whom the Lord Himself prayed that his faith might
not fail ; so his legitimate successors seated aloft on the Chair
of Rome . . . preserve the deposit of faith with supreme and
irrefutable powers of declaring the truth. . . . Wherefore we
also reject, proscribe, and forbid all the faithful of this Province,

* This Council was not included in the original draught from which the
Latin is taken.

APPENDIX. 171

to read or maintain, and much more to teach, the propositions
published by the Gallican Clergy in 1682, which have already
been censured this same year by the Archbishop of Gran, of
pious memory, and by the other Bishops of Hungary.'

5. The Plenary Council of Baltimore, which met in 1866 and
to which 44 Archbishops and Bishops subscribed, says : ' The
living and infallible authority nourishes in that Church alone
which was built by Christ upon Peter, who is the Head, Leader,
and Pastor of the whole Church, whose faith Christ promised
should never fail ; which ever had legitimate Pontiffs, dating
their origin in unbroken line from Peter himself, being seated
in his Chair, and being the inheritors and defenders of the like
doctrine, dignity, office, and power. And because, where Peter
is, there also is the Church, and because Peter speaks in the
person of the Roman Pontiff, ever lives , in his successors, passes
judgment and makes known the truths of faith to those who
seek them ; therefore are tjie Divine declarations to be received in
that sense in which they have been and are held by this Roman See
of blessed Peter, that mother and teacher of all Churches, which
has ever preserved whole and entire the teaching delivered by
Christ, and which has taught it to the faithful, showing to all men
the paths of salvation and the doctrine of everlasting truth.1

6. The first Provincial Council of Westminster, held in 1852,
states : ' When our Blessed Lord exhorts us, saying, Look to the
rock whence you are hewn ; look to Abraham your father, it is
fitting that we who have received our faith, our priesthood, and
the true religion, directly from the Apostolic See, should more
than others be attached to it by the bonds of love and fidelity.
Therefore do we maintain that foundation of truth and orthodoxy
which Jesus Christ willed should be maintained unshaken; namely,
the See of Peter, the teacher and mother of the whole world, the
Holy Roman Church. Whatever is once defined by it, for that very
reason alone we consider to be fixed and certain; when we look at
its traditions, rites, pious customs, discipline, and all its Apostolic
Constitutions, we follow and cherish them with all the affection
of our hearts. In fine, we of set purpose publicly declare our
obedience and respect for the Pope as Christ's Vicar, and we
remain united to him in the closest bonds of Catholic unity/

7. Nearly five hundred of the Bishops assembled in Borne to
celebrate the Centenary of the Martyrdom of SS. Peter and Paul,
in the year 1867, had no hesitation in addressing Pius IX. in the
following terms : ' Believing that Peter has spoken by the mouth
of Pius, whatever has been said, confirmed, and decreed by You

172 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

to preserve the deposit of faith, we also repeat, confirm, and
profess, and with one rnind and heart we reject all that You have
judged it necessary to reprove and condemn as contrary to Divine
faith, to the salvation of souls, and to the good of society. For
what the Fathers of Florence denned in their Decree of Union,
is firmly and deeply impressed in our minds ; that the Roman
Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ, the Head of the whole Church,
the Father and Teacher of all Christians.'

APPENDIX. 173

II.

LETTER OF H. E. CARDINAL ANTONELL1 TO
THE NUNCIO AT PARIS.

Rome, March 19, 1870.

MY LORD, — The Marquis de Banneville, ambassador of his
Majesty, read me, a few days ago, a despatch forwarded to him
under date February 20 last, from Count Daru, Minister of Foreign
Affairs, relative to the affairs of the Council. In this communica-
tion, of which the ambassador was kind enough to leave me a copy,
the aforesaid minister, referring to the resolution come to by the
French Government not to take part in the deliberations of the
General Council, desiring at the same time its liberty to be
guaranteed fully and absolutely, states that such resolution was
based on the supposition that that venerable assembly would
occupy itself solely about the sacred interests of the Faith, and
would abstain from touching questions of a purely political order.
But the publication (he says) by the ' Augsburg Gazette ' of the
canons appertaining to the draft of constitution on the Church
and on the Roman Pontiff, showing that there is question of
deciding whether the power of the Church and of her Head ex-
tends to the whole aggregate of political rights ; the Government,
keeping firmly to the resolution of leaving, upon this point also,
entire liberty to the deliberations of the august assembly, intends
to exercise the right given it by the Concordat of making known
to the Council its opinion on questions of such nature.

Passing to the examination of the said canons, the minister
sums up their contents (on which he wishes to comment) in the
two following propositions : — First, ' the Infallibility of the
Church extends not only to the Deposit of Faith, but to all that
is necessary for the preservation of such Deposit ' ; and secondly,
' the Church is a society divine and perfect ; its power is exer-
cised at once in foro interno et externo ; is absolute in the legisla-
tive, judicial, and coercive order, and is to be exercised by her
with full liberty and independence from any civil power what-
ever.' Hence, as corollaries of these two propositions, he deduces

174 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the extension of infallibility to all that is thought necessary for
the defence of revealed truths, and consequently to facts, whether
historical, philosophical, or scientific, external to revelation : as
also the absolute subordination to the supreme authority of the
Church of the constituent principles of civil society ; of the
rights and duties of Government ; of the political rights and
duties of citizens, whether electoral or municipal ; of all that
relates to the judicial and legislative order, as well in respect of
persons as of things ; of the rules of public administration ; of
the rights and duties of corporations, and, in general, of all the
rights of the State, not excluding the rights of conquest, peace,
and war.

Next the minister passes on to note the profound impression
which the simple enunciation of such doctrines must produce in
the entire world ; and asks at the same time how it could be
possible for the bishops to consent to abdicate their episcopal
authority, concentrating it in the hands of one alone ; and how
it could have been imagined that princes would lower their
sovereignty before the supremacy of the Court of Home.

Lastly, concluding, from all that has been set forth, that
political and not religious interests are being discussed in the
Council, Count Daru demands that the Governments be heard, or
at least admitted to bear testimony to the characters, disposi-
tions, and spirit (disposizioni di spirito) of the peoples they repre-
sent ; and in particular that since France, by reason of the special
protection which for twenty years she has exercised over the
Pontifical State, has quite special duties to perform, he demands
that the Government of that nation be permitted to exercise its
right of receiving communication of projected decisions touching
politics, and of requesting the delay necessary for bringing its
observations before the Council, before any resolution be adopted
by the same.

This is an abstract of the dispatch communicated to me by the
Marquis de Banneville. I have thought proper to inform your
Lordship of it ; with the view, moreover, of communicating to
you some short considerations which I think necessary to put in
a clearer light the points touched upon by the minister, and to
reply to the deductions made by him with respect to the points
submitted to the deliberations of the Council.

And first, I cannot dispense myself from manifesting to your
Lordship the satisfaction with which the Holy Father received
the declaration expressed at the beginning of Count Daru's de-
spatch, and repeated in the sequel, of the fixed intention of the

APPENDIX. 175

French Government to respect, and cause to be respected, in any
event, the full liberty of the Council, as well in the discussion of
the constitution referred to as of all others which shall hereafter
come to be proposed to the examination of the venerable assem-
bly. This declaration, which does great honour to the Govern-
ment of a Catholic nation, is considered by the Holy See as the
natural consequence of that protection which, for more than
twenty years, France has exercised towards it ; a protection
which has called forth several times public demonstrations of
gratitude on the part of the Supreme Pontiff, who always, but
especially at the present moment, cannot do less than recognise
and appreciate all its importance.

But, coming closer to the object of Count Daru's despatch, I
must say frankly that I am quite unable to understand (non mi
e dato di comprendere) how the declarations contained in the
draft of Constitution on the Church, and the respective canons — •
published in the ' Augsburg Gazette ' by a breach of the Pontifi-
cal secret- — could have produced so grave and profound an im-
pression on the mind of the French Cabinet, as to induce it to
change the line of conduct which it had properly traced out for
itself in regard to the discussions of the Vatican Council. The
subjects treated in that draft of constitution, and in the canons
appertaining to it, whatever modification they may undergo in
the sequel from the judgment and decision of the Episcopate, are
DO more than the exposition of the maxims and fundamental
principles of the Church ; principles repeated over and over again
in the Acts of former General Councils, proclaimed and developed
in several Pontifical Constitutions, published in all Catholic
states, and particularly in the celebrated dogmatic Bulls beginning
' Unigenitus,' and ' Auctorem Fidei,' where all the aforesaid
doctrines are generally confirmed and sanctioned ; principles,
finally, which have constantly formed the basis of teaching in all
periods of the Church, and in all Catholic schools, and have been
defended by an innumerable host of ecclesiastical writers, whose
works have served for text in public schools and colleges, as well
Government schools as others, without any contradiction on the
part of the civil authority, but rather, for the most part, with
the approbation and encouragement of the same.

Much less would it be possible for me to agree upon the char-
acter and extent given by the minister to the doctrines contained
in the aforesaid canons. In virtue of them there is not attributed,
either to the Church or the Roman Pontiff, that direct and abso-
lute power over the whole aggregate of political rights, of which

176 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the despatch speaks ; nor is the subordination of the civil to the
religious power to be understood in the sense set forth by him,
but in another order of quite different bearing.

And in truth the Church has never intended, nor now intends, to
exercise any direct and absolute power over the political rights of
the State. Having received from God the lofty mission of guiding
men, whether individually or as congregated in society, to a super-
natural end, she has by that very fact the authority and the duty
to judge concerning the morality and justice of all acts, internal
and external, in relation to their conformity with the natural and
divine law. And as no action, whether it be ordained by a
supreme power, or be freely elicited by an individual, can be
exempt from this character of morality and justice, so it happens
that the judgment of the Church, though falling directly on the
morality of the acts, indirectly reaches over everything with
which that morality is conjoined. But this is not the same
thing as to interfere directly in political affairs, which, by the
order established by God and by the teaching of the Church
herself, appertains to the temporal power without dependence on
any other authority. The subordination also of the civil to the
religious power is in the sense of the pre-eminence of the
sacerdotium over the imperium, because of the superiority of the
end of the one over that of the other.* Hence the authority of
the imperium depends on that of the sacerdotium, as human
things on divine, temporal on spiritual. And if temporal
happiness, which is the end of the civil power, is subordinate to
eternal beatitude, which is the spiritual end of the sacerdotium,
it follows that in order to reach the end to which it has pleased
God to direct them, the one power is subordinate to the other.
Their powers (I say) are respectively subordinate in the same
way as the ends to which they are directed.

It results from these principles that, if the infallibility of the
Church extends also (not, however, in the sense indicated by the
French despatch) to all that is necessary to preserve intact the
Deposit of Faith, no harm is thereby done to science, history, or
politics. The prerogative of infallibility is not an unknown fact
in the Catholic world ; the supreme magisterium of the Church
has dictated in every age rules of faith, without the internal
order of States being thereby affected (risentirsene), or princes

* We have no exact English equivalents for the abstract terms — sacerdozio,
impero. ' Sacerdozio ' means the priestly office, and ' impero ' civil authority
in the most general sense. — Note of TR.]

APPENDIX. 177

being disquieted thereat ; rather, wisely appreciating the in-
fluence which such rules have on the good order of civil society,
these have been themselves, from time to time, the vindicators
and defenders of the doctrines defined, and have promoted, by
the concurrence of the royal power, their full and respectful
observance.

It follows, moreover, that if the Church was instituted by its
Divine Founder as a true and perfect society, distinct from the
civil power and independent of it, with full authority in the
triple order, legislative, judicial, and coercive, no confusion
springs therefrom in the march of human society, and in the
exercise of the rights of the two powers. The competence of the
one and the other is clearly distinct and determined, according
to the end to which they are respectively directed. The Church
does not, in virtue of her authority, intervene directly and
absolutely in the constitutive principles of governments, in the
forms of civil regulations, in the political rights of citizens, in
the duties of the State, and in the other points indicated in the
minister's note, But, whereas no civil society can subsist
without a supreme principle regulating the morality of its acts
and laws, the Church has received from God this lofty mission,
which tends to the happiness of the people, while she in no way
embarrasses, by the exercise of this her ministry, the free and
prompt action of Governments. She, in fact, by inculcating the
principle of rendering to God that which is God's, and to Caasar
that which is Caesar's, imposes at the same time upon her
children the obligation of obeying the authority of princes for
conscience sake. But these should also recognize that if any-
where a law is made opposed to the principles of eternal justice,
to obey would not be a giving to Caesar that which is Caesar's,
but a taking from God that which is God's.

I proceed now to say a word on the profound impression which
the minister expects will be made throughout the world by the
mere enunciation of the principles developed in the draft of con-
stitution which forms the object of his despatch. In truth it is
not easy to persuade oneself how the doctrines contained in that
draft, and understood in the sense above pointed out, can produce
the profound impression of which the minister speaks ; unless in-
deed their spirit and character be wrested, or that he speaks of
those who, professing principles different from those professed by
the Catholic Church, cannot of course approve of such principles
being inculcated and sanctioned afresh. I say afresh ; because
the doctrines contained in that document, as I have already

178 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

remarked, far from being new and unheard of, embrace no more
(non sono nel loro complesso) than the reproduction of the
Catholic teaching professed in every age and in every Church, as
will be solemnly proved by all the pastors of the Catholic name,
called by the head of the hierarchy to bear authentic witness, in
the midst of the Council, to the faith and traditions of the Church
Universal. It is to be hoped rather that the Catholic doctrine,
once more solemnly confirmed by the Fathers of the Vatican
Council, will be greeted by the faithful people as the rainbow of
peace and the dawn of a brighter future. The object of confirm-
ing those doctrines is no other than to recall to modern society
the maxims of justice and virtue, and thus to restore to the world
that peace and prosperity which can only be found in the perfect
keeping of the divine law. This is the firm hope of all honest
men, who received with joy the announcement of the Council ;
this is the conviction of the Fathers of the Church, who have as-
sembled with alacrity in such numbers at the voice of the Chief
Pastor ; this is the prayer which the Vicar of Jesus Christ is
always sending up to God in the midst of the grievous troubles
which surround his Pontificate.

For the rest, I do not understand why the bishops should have
to renounce their episcopal authority in consequence of the defini-
tion of Pontifical Infallibility. This prerogative is not only as
ancient as the Church herself, but has been, moreover, always
exercised in the Roman Church, without the divine authority and
the rights conferred by God on the pastors of the Church being
thereby altered in the least degree. Its definition therefore would
in no way go to change the relations between the bishops and
their head. The rights of the one and the prerogatives of the
other are well defined in the Church's divine constitution ; and
the confirmation of the Roman Pontiff's supreme authority and
magisterium, far from being prejudicial to the rights of bishops,
will furnish a new support to their authority and magisterium, •
since the strength and vigour of the members is just so much as
comes to them from the head.

By parity of reason — the authority of the pastors of the Church
being strengthened anew by the solemn confirmation of Pontifi-
cal Infallibility — that of princes, especially Catholic princes, will
be no less strengthened. The prosperity of the Church and the
peace of the State depend upon the close and intimate union of
the two supreme powers. Who does not see then that the au-
thority of princes not only will not receive any blow from the
pontifical supremacy, but will instead find therein its strongest

APPENDIX. 179

support ? As sons of the Church, they owe obedience, respect,
and protection to the authority placed on earth by God to guide
princes and peoples to the last end of eternal salvation ; nor can
they refuse to recognise that royal power has been granted them
for the defence also and guardianship of Christian society. But
by the very fact of the principle of authority receiving new vigour
in the Church and in its head, the sovereign power must neces-
sarily receive a new impulse, since it has from God a common
origin, and consequently common interests also. And so, if the
wickedness of the age, by separating the one from the other, has
placed both in troublesome and painful conditions, to the great
injury of human society, closer relations will unite both in indis-
soluble bonds for the defence of the grand interests of religion and
society, and will prepare for them the way to a brighter and more
prosperous future.

From what has been said up to this point it results clearly that
the Council has not been called to discuss political interests, as
the despatch of Count Daru seems to indicate. We may con-
clude, therefore, that the French Government, finding no longer
a sufficient reason for departing from the line of conduct it had
set itself to follow in respect of the Council, will not desire to in-
sist on the request for communication of the Decrees which will
be submitted to the examination and discussion of the venerable
assembly of bishops. On which point indeed it occurs to me to
observe that the right claimed for his purpose by the minister on
the ground of the Concordat in force between the Holy See and
France, cannot, in my opinion, find any support in that act. In
the first place, no special mention of this particular point is found
in the articles of that convention. Then, further, the relations
of Church and State on points belonging to both powers (punto
di mista competenza) having been regulated by the Concordat,
the decisions, which may be come to by the Vatican Council on
such matters will in no way alter the special stipulations made
by the Holy See, as well with France as with other governments,
as long as these place no obstacles in the way of the full keeping
of the conditions agreed upon. I may also add that if the Holy
See has not thought fit to invite Catholic princes to the Council,
as it did on other occasions, every one will easily understand that
this is chiefly to be attributed to the changed circumstances of
the times. The altered state of the relations between the Church
and the Civil Governments has made more difficult their mutual
action in the regulation of things religious.

I desire however to hope that the Government of his Majesty

N 2

180 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the Emperor, fully satisfied with the explanations given by me in
the name of the Holy See to the various points of Count Dam's
despatch, and recognising at the same time the difficulties in
which the Holy Father might find himself, will not insist further
on the demand of communication beforehand of the drafts of
constitutions to be examined by the Fathers of the Council.
Were such demand conceded, there would be question of things
tending to embarrass the free action of the Council. Moreover,
since the Church is keeping within the limits assigned to her by
her Divine Founder, no anxiety need remain to the Government
of his Majesty on account of the deliberations which may come to
be adopted by the Episcopal assembly. Finally the French
Government will thus give, by the very fact, a new proof of those
dispositions of goodwill which it has manifested in respect of the
full liberty of the Conciliar deliberations, and of the confidence
which it declares it reposes in the wisdom and prudence of the
Apostolic See.

Your Lordship will please read this despatch to Count Daru,
as also leave him a copy.

Meanwhile receive, &c. &c.,

(Signed) G. CAED. ANTONELLI.

APPENDIX. 181

III.

ACT OF CONDEMNATION BY THE COUNCIL OF
CERTAIN PAMPHLETS, &c.

REVERENDISSIMI PATEES, — Ex quo Sacrosancta Sy nodus Yaticana,
opitulante Deo, congregata est, acerrimum statim contra earn
bellum exarsit ; atque ad venerandam, eius auctoritatem penes
fidelem populum imminuendam, ac si fieri posset, penitus labefac-
tandam, contumeliose de ilia detrahere, eamque putidissimis
calumniis oppetere plures scriptores certatim aggressi sunt non
modo inter heterodoxos et apertos Crucis Christi inimicos, sed
etiam inter eos qui Catholicae Eeclesiae filios sese dictitant, et quod
maxim e dolendum est inter ipsos eius sacros ministros.

Quae in publicis cuiusque idiomatis ephemeridibus, quae-
que in libellis absque auctoris nomine passim editis et furtive
distributis, congesta hac de re fuerint probrosa mendacia, omnes
apprime norunt, quin nobis necesse sit ilia singillatim edicere.
Verum inter anonymos istiusmodi libellos duo praesertim extant,
gallice conscripti sub titulis : Ce qui se passe au Concile et La
dernier e heure du Concile, qui ob suam ealumniandi artem,
obtrectandique licentiam ceteris palmam praeripuisse videntur.
In his enim nedum huius Concilii dignitas ae plena libertas
turpissimis oppugnantur mendaciis, iuraque Apostolicae Sedis
. evertuntur ; sed ipsa quoque SSmi Dni Nostri augusta persona
gravibus lacessitur iniuriis. lam vero Nos officii nostri memores,
ne silentium nostrum, si diutius protraheretur, sinistre a
malevolis hominibus interpretari valeat, contra tot tantasque
obtrectationes vocem extollere cogimur, atque in conspectu
omnium vestrum, Bmi Patres, protestari ac declarare : falsa om-
nino esse et calumniosa quaecumque in praedictis ephemeridibus et
libellis effutiuntur, sive in spretum et contumeliam SSmi Dni
Nostri et Apostolicae Sedis, sive in dedecus huius Sacrosanctae
Synodi, et contra assertum defectum in ilia legitimae libertatis.

Datum ex Aula Concilii Yaticani, die ]6 lulii 1870.

PHILIPPUS Card. DE ANGELIS Praeses.
ANTONINUS Card. DE LUCA Praeses.
ANDREAS Card. BIZZARRI Praeses.
ALOTSIUS Card. BILIO Praeses.
HANNIBAL Card. CAPALTI Praeses.

IOSEPHUS Ep. S. Hippolyti, Secretarius.

182 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

IV.

TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTIONS.

.
CONSTITUTIO DOGMATICA DE FIDE CATHOLICA.

PIUS EPISCOPUS, SERVUS SERVORUM DEI, SACRO APPROBANTE
CONCILIO, AD PEEPETUAM REI MEMORIAM.

DEI Filius et generis Immani Redemptor Dorainus Nbster Jesus
Christus, ad Patrein coelestem rediturus, cum Ecclesia sua in
terris militante, omnibus diebus usque ad coiisummationem
saeculi futurum se esse promisit. Quare dilectae Sponsee preesto
esse, adsistere docenti, operanti benedicere, periclitanti opem
ferre nullo unquam tempore destitit. Haec vero salutaris ejus
providentia, cum ex aliis beneficiis innumeris continenter appa-
ruit, tuna iis manifesfcissime comperta est fructibus, qui orbi
christiano e Conciliis cecumenicis ac nominatim e Tridentino,
iniquis licet temporibus celebrate, amplissimi provenerunt. Hinc
enim sanctissima religionis dogmata pressius definita, uberiusque
exposita, errores damnati atque cohibiti ; hinc ecclesiastica dis-
ciplina restituta firmiusque sancita, promotum in Clero scientise
et pietatis studium, parata adolescentibus ad sacram militiam
educandis collegia, christiani denique populi mores efc accuratiore
fidelium eruditione et frequentiore sacramentorum usu instaurati.
Hinc praeterea arctior membrorum cum visibili capite communio,
universoque corpori Christi mystico additus vigor ; hinc religiosee
multiplicatse familiae, aliaque Christianas pietatis instituta, hinc
ille etiam assiduus et usque ad sanguinis effusionem constans
ardor in Christi regno late per orbem propagando.

Verumtamen haec aliaque insignia emolumenta, quas per ulti-
mam maxime oecumenicam Synodum divina dementia Ecclesiee
largita est, duni grato, quo par est, animo recolimus, acerbum
compescere haud possumus dolorem ob mala gravissima, inde
potissimum orta, quod ejusdem sacrosanctaa Synodi apud per-

APPENDIX. 183

multos vel aucfcoritas contempta, vel sapientissima neglecta fuere
decreta.

Nemo enim ignorat haereses quas Tridentini Patres proscrip-
serunt, dum, rejecto divino Ecelesise magisterio, res ad religionem
spectantes privati cujusvis judicio permitterentur, in sectas paula-
tim dissolutas esse multiplices, quibus inter se dissentientibus et
concertantibus, omnis tandem in Christum fides apud non paucos
labefacta est. Itaque ipsa sacra Biblia, quee antea christianra
doctrinae unicus fons et judex asserebantur, jam non pro divinis
haberi, imo mythicis commentis accenseri coeperunt.

Turn nata est et late nimis per orbem vagata ilia rationalism!
sen naturalism! doctrina, quse religioni Christianas utpote super-
naturali institute per omnia adversans, summo studio molitur,
ut Christo, qui solus Deminus et Salvator noster est, a mentibus
humanis, a vita et moribus populorum excluso, nierse quod
vocant rationis vel naturae regiium stabiliatur. Relicta auteni
projectaque Christiana religione, negato vero Deo et Christo ejus,
prolapsa tandem est multorum mens in pantheism! materialism!
atheismi barathrum, ut jam ipsam rationalem naturam, omnemque
justi rectique normam negantes, ima humanae societatis funda-
menta diruere connitantur.

Hac porro impietate circumquaque grassante, infeliciter con-
tigit, ut plures etiam e catholicae Ecclesia3 filiis a via verae pietatis
aberrarent, in iisque, diminutis paullatim veritatibus, sensus catho-
licus attenuaretur. Variis enim ac peregrinis doctrinis abducti,
naturam et gratiam, scientiam humanam et fidem divinam perpe-
ram commiscentes, genuinum sensum dogmatum, quem tenet ac
docet Sancta Mater Ecclesia, depravare, integritatemque et sin-
ceritatem fidei in periculum adducere comperiuntur.

Quibus omnibus perspectis, fieri qui potest, ut non commovean-
tur intima Ecclesias viscera ? Quemadmodum enim Deus vult
omnes homines salvos fieri, et ad agnitionem veritatis venire ;
quemadmodum Christus venit, ut salvum faceret, quod perierat,
et filios Dei, qui erant dispersi, congregaret in unum : ita Ecclesia,
a Deo populorum mater et magistra constitute, omnibus debitri-
cem se novit, ac lapses erigere, labantes sustinere, revertentes
amplecti, confirmare bonos et ad meliora provehere parata semper
et intenta est. Quapropter nullo tempore a Dei veritate, qua3
sanat omnia, testanda et praedicanda quiescere potest, sibi dictum
esse non ignorans : ' Spiritus meus, qui est in te, et verba mea,
quae posui in ore tuo, non recedent de ore tuo amodo et usque in
sempi ternum.' *

*'Isai. lix. 21.

184 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Nbs itaque, inhserentes Prosdecessorum Nostrorum vestigiis, pro
supremo Nostro Apostolico munere veritatem catliolicam docere
ac tueri, perversasque doctrinas reprobare nunquam intermisimus.
Nunc autem sedentibus Nobiscum et judicantibus universi orbis
Episcopis, in hanc cecumenicam Synodum auctoritate Nostra in
Spiritu Sancto congregatis, innixi Dei verbo scripto et tradito,
proufc ab Ecclesia catholica sancte custoditum et genuine exposi-
tum accepimus, ex Me Petri Cathedra in conspectu omnium
salutarem Christi doctrinam profiteri et declarare constituimus,
adversis erroribus potestate nobis a Deo tradita proscriptis atque
damnatis.

CAPUT I.

DE DEO RE RUM OMNIUM CREATORS.

Sancta Catholica Apostolica Bomana Ecclesia credit et confite-
tur, unum esse Deum verum et vivum, Creatorem ac Dominum
coeli et terrae, omnipotentem, aeternum, immensum, incomprehensi-
bilem, intellectu ac voluntate omnique perfectione infiiiitum ; qui
cum sit Una singularis, simplex omnino et incommutabilis sub-
stantia spiritualis, prasdicandus est re et essentia a mundo
distinctus, in se et ex se beatissimus, et super omnia, quas praster
ipsum sunt et concipi possunt, ineffabiliter excelsus.

Hie solus verus Deus bonitate sua et omnipotenti virtute non
ad augendam suam beatitudinem, nee ad acquirendam, sed ad
manifestandam perfectionem suam per bona, quae creaturis iraper-
iitur, liberrimo consilio simul ab initib temporis utramque de
nihilo condidit creaturam, spiritualem et corporalem, angelicam
videlicet et mundanam, ac deinde humanam quasi communem ex
spiritu et cor pore constitutam.*

Universa vero, quas condidit, Deus providentia sua tuetur atque
gubernat, attingens a fine usque ad finem fortiter, et disponens
omnia suaviter."f" Omnia enim nuda et aperta sunt oculis
ea etiani, quae libera creaturarum actione futura sunt.

* Concil. Lateran. IV. cap. i. De fide Catholica. f Sap. viii. 1.

± Cf. Hebr. iv. 13.

APPENDIX. 185

CAPUT II.

DE REVELATIONS.

Eadem sancta Mater Ecclesia tenet et docet, Deum, remm
omnium principiuin et finem, natural! humanse ration is lumine e
rebus creatis certo cognosci posse ; invisibilia enim ipsius, a
creatura mundi, per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta, conspiciuntur : *
attamen placuisse ejus sapientise et bonitati, alia, eaque supernatu-
rali via se ipsum ac aeterna voluntatis suas decreta humano generi
revelare, dicente Apostolo : ' Multifariam, multisque modis olim
Deus loquens patribus in Prophetis : novissime, diebus istis locu-
tus est nobis in Filio.' f

Huic divines revelationi tribuendum quidem est, ut ea, quaa in
rebus divinis humanse rationi per se impervia non sunt, in present!
quoque generis human i conditione ab omnibus expedite, firma
certitudine et nullo admixto errore cognosci possint. Non Me
tamen de causa revelatio absolute necessaria dicenda est, sed quia
Deus ex infinita bonitate sua ordinavit hominem ad finem super-
naturalem, ad participanda scilicet bona divina, quae humanas
mentis intelligentiam omnino superant ; siquidem oculus non vidit,
nee auris audivit, nee in cor hominis ascendit, quae praeparavit
Deus iis, qiii diligunt ilium. J

Haec porro supernaturalis revelatio, secundum universalis
Ecclesiaa fidem, a sancta Tridentina Synodo declaratam, contine-
tur in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus, quee ipsius
Chris ti ore ab Apostolis acceptae, aut ab ipsis Apostolis Spiritu.
Sancto dictante quasi per manus tradita?, ad nos usque pervene-
runt.§ Qui quidem veteris et novi Testament! libri integri cum
omnibus suis partibus, prout in ejusdem Concilii decreto recen-
sentur, et in veteri vulgata latin a edition e habentur, pro sacris et
canonicis suscipiendi sunt. Eos vero Ecclesia pro sacris et canon-
icis habet, non ideo quod sola humana indu stria concinnati, sua
deinde auctoritate sint approbati; nee ideo dumtaxat, quod
revelationem sine errore contineant ; sed propterea quod Spiritn
Sancto inspirante conscripti Deum habent auctorem, atque nt
tales ipsi Ecclesiae traditi sunt.

Quoniam vero, quse sancta Tridentina Synodus de interpreta-
tione divinas Scripturas ad coercenda petulantia ingenia salubriter
decrevit, a quibusdam hominibus prave exponuntur, Nos, idem

* Rom. i. 20. f Hebr. i. 1, 2.

§ Concil. Trid. Sess. IV. de Can. Script.

186 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

decretum renovantes, hanc illius mentem esse declaramus, ut in
rebus fidei et morum, ad aedificationem doctrines Christianas, per-
tinentium, is pro vero sensu sacra? Scriptures liabendus sit, quern
tenuit ac tenet Sancta Mater Ecclesia, cujus est judicare de vero
sensu et interpretatione Scripturarum sanctarum ; atque ideo
nemini licere contra hunc sensum, aut etiam contra unanimem
consensum Patrum ipsam Scripturam sacram interpretari.

CAPUT III.

DE FIDE.

Quum homo a Deo tanquam Creatore et Domino suo totus de-
pendeat, et ratio creata increatas Yeritati penitus subjecta sit,
plenum revelanti Deo intellectus et voluntatis obsequium fide
prasstare tenemur. Hanc vero fidem, quas humanas salutis
initium est, Ecclesia catholica profitetur, virtutem esse super-
naturalem, qua, Dei aspirante et adjuvante gratia, ab eo revelata
vera esse credimus, non propter intrinsecam rerum veritatem
naturali rationis lumine perspectam, sed propter auctoritatem
ipsius Dei revelantis, qui nee falli nee fallere potest. Est enim
fides, testante Apostolo, sperandarum substantia rerum, argumen-
tum non apparentium.*

Ut nihilominus fidei nostrse obsequium rationi consentaneum
esset, voluit Deus cum internis Spiritus Sancti auxiliis externa
jungi revelationis suao argumenta, facta scilicet divina, atque
imprimis miracula et prophetias, quae cum Dei omnipotentiam et
infinitam scientiam luculenter commonstrent, divinas revelationis
signa sunt certissima et omnium intelligences accommodata.
Quare turn Moyses et Prophetae, turn ipse maxime Christus
Dominus multa et manifestissima miracula et prophetias ediderunt,
et de Apostolis legimus : * Illi autem profecti prasdieaverunt
ubique, Domino cooperante, et sermonem confirmante, sequentibus
signis.' f Et rursum scriptum est : ' Habemus firmiorem propheti-
cum sermonem, cui bene facitis attendentes quasi lucernes lucenti
in caliginoso loco.' J

Licet autem fidei assensus nequaquam sit motus animi caecus :
nemo tamen evangelicas praedicationi consentire potest, sicut
oportet ad salutem consequendam, absque illuminatione et inspi-

* Hebr. xi. 1. t Marc. xvi. 20. t 2 Petr. i. 19.

APPENDIX. 187

ratione Spiritus Sancti, qui dat omnibus suavitatem in consenti-
endo et credendo veritati.* Quare fides ipsa in se, etiamsi per
cliaritatem non operetur, donum Dei est, efc actus ejus est opus ad
salutem pertinens, quo homo liberam preestat ipsi Deo obedien-
tiam gratiaa ejus, cui resistere posset, consentiendo et cooperando.

Porro fide divina et catholica ea omnia credenda sunt, quaa in
verbo Dei scripto vel tradito continentur, et ab Ecclesia sive
solemni judicio sive ordinario et universali magisterio tamquam
divinitus revelata credenda proponuntur.

Quoniam vero sine fide impossibile est placere Deo, et ad
filiorum ejus consortium pervenire ; ideo nemini unquam sine ilia
contigit justificatio, nee ullus, nisi in ea perseveraverit usque in
finem, vitam seternam assequetur. Ut autem officio veram fidem
amplectendi, in eaque constanter perseverandi satisfacere posse-
mus, Deus per Filium suum unigenitum Ecclesiam instituit, suoeque
institutionis manifestis notis instruxit, ut ea tamquam custos et
magistra verbi revelati ab omnibus posset agnosci. Ad solam
enim catholicam Ecclesiam ea pertinent omnia, quee ad evidentem
fidei cliristianae credibilitatem tarn multa et tarn mira divinitus
sunt disposita. Quin etiani Ecclesia per se ipsa, ob suam nempe
admirabilem propagationem, eximiam sanctitatem et inexhaustam
in omnibus bonis fcecunditatem, ob catholicam unitatem, invict-
amque stabilitatem, magnum quoddam et perpetuum est motivuni
credibilitatis et divinas suse legationis testimonium irrefragabile.

Quo fit, ut ipsa veluti signum levatum in nationes,f et ad se
invitet, qui nondum crediderunt, et filios suos certiores faciat,
firmissimo niti fundamento fidem, quam profitentur. Cui quidem
testimonio efficax subsidium accedit ex superna virtute. Etenim
benignissimus Dominus et errantes gratia sua excitat atque
adjuvat, ut ad agnitionem veritatis venire possint ; et eos, quos
de tenebris transtulit in admirabile lumen suum, in hoc eodem
lumine ut perseverent, gratia sua confirmat, non deserens, nisi
deseratur. Quocirca miniine par est conditio eorum, qui per
cceleste fidei donum catholicse veritati adheeserunt, atque eorum,
qui ducti opinionibus humanis, falsam religionem sectantur ; illi
enim, qui fidem sub Ecclesias magisterio susceperunt, nullam un-
quam habere possunt justam causam mutandi, aut in dubium
fidem eamdem revocandi. Quoa cum ita sint, gratias agentes Deo
Patri, qui dignos nos fecit in partem sortis sanctorum in lumine,
tantam ne-negligamus salutem, sed aspicientes in auctorem fidei
et consummatorem Jesum, teneamus spei nostrae confessionem
indeclinabilem.

* Syn. Araus. ii. can. 7. f Isai. xi. 12.

188 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CAPUT IV.

DE FIDE ET RATIONE.

Hoc qiioque perpetuus Ecclesiae catholicaa consensus tenuit et
tenet, duplicem esse ordinem cognitioiiis, non solum principio, sed
objecto etiam distinctum : principio quidem, quia in altero
naturali ratione, in altero fide divina cognoscimus ; objecto
autem, quia praeter ea, ad quse naturalis ratio pertingere potest,
credenda nobis proponuntur mysteria in Deo abscondita, quas,
nisi revelata divinitus, innotescere non possunt. Quocirca Apo-
stolus, qui a gentibus Deum per ea, quaa facta sunt, cognitum esse
testatur, disserens tamen de gratia et veritate, quaa per Jesum
Christum facta est,* pronuntiat: 'Loquimur Dei sapientiam in
mysterio, quae abscondita est, quam preedestinavit Deus ante
saecula in gloriam nostram, quam nemo principum hujus saeculi
cognovit : nobis autem revelavit Deus per Spiritum suum :
Spiritus enim omnia scrutatur, etiam profunda Dei.f Et ipse
Unigenitus confitetur Patri, quia abscondit hsec a sapientibus, et
prudentibus, et revelavit ea parvulis. J

Ac ratio quidem, fide illustrata, cum sedulo, pie et sobrie
quaerit, aliquam, Deo dante, mysteriorum intelligentiam eamque
fructuosissimam assequitur, turn ex eorum, qua3 naturaliter cogno-
scit, analogia, turn e mysteriorum ipsorum nexu inter se et cum
fine hominis ultimo ; numquam tamen idonea redditur ad ea
perspicienda instar veritatum, quaa proprium ipsius objectum
constituunt. Divina enim mysteria suapte natura intellectum
creatum sic excedunt, ut etiam revelatione tradifca et fide suscepta,
ipsius tamen fidei velamine contecta et quadam quasi caligine
obvoluta maneant, quamdiu in hac mortali vita peregrinamur a
Domino : per fidem enim ambulamus, et non per speciem.§

Yerum etsi fides sit supra rationem, nulla tamen unquam inter
fidem et rationem vera dissensio esse potest ; cum idem Deus,
qui mysteria revelat et fidem infundit, animo humano rationis
lumen indiderit ; Deus autem negare seipsum non possit, nee
verum vero unquam contradicere. Inanis autem hujus contra-
diction! s species inde potissimum oritur, quod vel fidei dogmata
ad mentem Ecclesiaa intellecta et exposita non fuerint, vel
opinionum commenta pro rationis efiatis habeantur. Omnem
igitur asserfcionem veritati illuminataa fidei contrariam omnino

* Joan, i. 17. t 1 Cor. ii. 7, 9. J Matth. xi. 25. §" 2 Cor. v. 7.

APPENDIX. 189

falsam esse definimus.* Porro Ecclesia, quae una cum apostolico
munere docendi, mandatum accepit, fidei depositum custodiendi,
jus etiam et officium divinitus habet falsi nominis -scientiam
proscribendi, ne quis decipiatur per philosophiam, et inanem
fallaciam.'j' Quapropter omnes christiani fideles hujusmodi opi-
niones, quae fidei doctrinae contrariae esse cognoscuntur, maxime
si ab Eeclesia reprobatae fuerint, non solum prohibentur tanquam
legitimas scientiaa conclusiones defendere, sed pro erroribus potius,
qui fallacem veritatis speciem praa se ferant, habere tenentur
omnino.

Neque solum fides et ratio inter se dissidere nunquam possunt,
sed opem quoque sibi mutuam ferunt, cum recta ratio fidei fun-
damenta demonstret, ejusque lumine illustrata rerum divinarum
scientiam excolat; fides vero rationem ab erroribus liberet ac
tueatur, eamque multiplici cognitione instruat. Quapropter
tantum abest, ut Ecclesia humanarum artium et disciplinarum
culturae obsistat, ut hanc multis modis juvet atque promoveat.
Nonenimcommodaab iis adhominumvitam dimanantia autignorat
aut despicit ; fatetur imo, eas, quemadmodum a Deo, scientiarum
Domino, profectae sunt, ita si rite pertractentur, ad Deum, juvante
ejus gratia, perducere. Nee sane ipsa vetat, ne hujusmodi disci-
plina3 in suo quasque ambitu propriis utantur principiis et propria
methodo ; sed justam nanc libertatem agnoscens, id sedulo cavet,
ne divinae doctrinae repugnando errores in se suscipiant, aut fines
proprios trangressas, ea, quas sunt fidei, occupent et perturbent.

Neque enim fidei doctrina, quam Deus revelavit, velut philoso-
pMcum inventum proposita est humanis ingeniis perficienda, sed
tanquam divinum depositum Christi Sponsae tradita, fideliter
custodiendo et infallibiliter declaranda. Hinc sacrorum quoque
dogmatum is sensus perpetuo est retinendus, quern semel declar-
avit Sancta Mater Ecclesia, nee unquam ab eo sensu, altioris
intelligentiae specie et nomine, recedendum. Crescat igitur et
multum vehementerque proficiat, tarn singulorum, quam omnium,
tarn unius hominis, quam totius Ecclesias, setatum ac saDculorum
gradibus, intelligentia, scientia, sapientia : sed in suo dumtaxat
genere, in eodem scilicet dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque
sententia.J

* Concil. Lateran. V. Bulla Apostolici regiminis. -j- Coloss. ii. 8.

J Vincent. Lirin. Common, n. 28.

190 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CANOKES.

De Deo rerum omnium Creatore.

1. Si quis unum verum Deum visibilium et invisibilium Crea-
toruni et Dominum negaverit ; anathema sit.

2. Si quis prater materiam niliil esse affirmare non erubuerit ;
anathema sit.

3. Si quis dixerit, nnam eamdemque esse Dei et rerum omnium
substantiam vel essentiam ; anathema sit.

4. Si quis dixerit, res finitas, turn corporeas turn spirituales,
aut saltern spirituales, e divina substantia emanasse ;

aut diyinam essentiam sui manifestation vel evolutione fieri
omnia ;

aut denique Deum esse ens universale seu indefinitum, quod
sesedeterminandoconstituat rerum universitatem in genera, species
et individua distinctam ; anathema sit.

5. Si quis non confiteatur, mundum, resque omnes, qua3 in eo
continentur, et spirituales et materiales, secundum totam suam
substantiam a Deo ex nihilo esse productas ;

aut Deum dixerit non voluntate ab omni necessitate libera, sed
tarn necessario creasse, quam necessario amat seipsum ;

aut mundum ad Dei gloriam conditum esse negaverit ; anathema
sit.

II.

De Revelations.

1. Si quis dixerit, Deum unum et verum, Creatorern et
Dominum nostrum, per ea, quee facta sunt, naturali rationis
humanas lumine certo cognosci non posse ; anathema sit.

2. Si quis dixerit, fieri non posse, aut non expedire, lit per
revelationem divinam homo de Deo, cultuque ei exhibendo
edoceatur ; anathema sit.

3. Si quis dixerit, hominem ad cognitionem et perfectionem,
quae naturalem superet, divinitus evehi non posse, sed ex seipso
ad omnis tandem veri et boni possessionem jugi profectu per-
tingere posse et debere ; anathema sit.

APPENDIX. 191

4. Si quis sacrse Scripturae libros integros cum omnibus suis
partibus, prout illos sancta Tridentina Synodus recensuit, pro
sacris et canonicis non susceperit, aut eos divinitiis inspiratos esse
negaverit ; anathema sit.

III.

De Fide.

. 1. Si quis dixerit, rationem humanam ita independentem esse,
ut fides ei a Deo imperari non possit ; anathema sit.

2. Si quis dixerit, fidem divinam a naturali de Deo et rebus
moralibus scientia non distingui, ac propterea ad fidem divinam
non requiri, ut revelata veritas propter auctoritatem Dei re-
velantis credatur ; anathema sit.

3. Si quis dixerit, revelationem divinam externis signis
credibilem fieri non posse, ideoque sola interna cujusque ex-
perientia aut inspiratione privata homines ad fidem mover!
debere ; anathema sit.

4. Si quis dixerit, miracula nulla fieri posse, proindeque omnes
de iis narrationes, etiam in sacra Scriptura contentas, inter
fabulas vel mythos ablegandas esse : aut miracula certo cognosci
nunquam posse, nee iis divinam religionis christianee originem
rite probari ; anathema sit.

5. Si quis dixerit, assensum fidei christianae non esse liberum,
sed argumentis humanee rationis necessario produci ; aut ad
solam fidem vivam, quse per charitatem operatur, gratiam Dei
necessariam esse ; anathema sit.

6. Si quis dixerit, parem esse conditionem fidelium atque
eorum, qui ad fidem unice veram nondum pervenerunt, ita ut
catholici justam causam habere possint, fidem, quam sub Ecclesiae
magisterio jam susceperunt, assensu suspense in dubium vocandi,
donee demons trationem scientificam credibilitatis et veritatis fidei
suss absolverint ; anathema sit.

IV.

De Fide et Eatione.

1. Si quis dixerit, in revelatione divina nulla vera et proprie
dicta mysteria contineri, sed universa fidei dogmata posse per
rationem rite excultam e naturalibus principiis intelligi et demon -
strari ; anathema sit.

192 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

2. Si quis dixerit, disciplinas humanas ea cum libertate trac-
tandas esse, ut earum assertiones, etsi doctrine revelatse adver-
sentur, tanquam verge retineri, neque ab Ecclesia proscribi
possint ; anathema sit.

3. Si quis dixerit, fieri posse, ut dogmatibus ab Ecclesia
propositis, aliquando secundum progressum scientiaD sensus
tribuendus sit alius ab eo, quern intellexit et intelligit Ecclesia ;
anathema sit.

Itaque supremi pastoralis Nostri officii debitum exequentes,
omnes Christi fideles, niaxime vere eos, qui prsesunt vel docendi
munere funguntur, per viscera Jesu Christi obtestamur, nee non
ejusdem Dei et Salvatoris nostri auctoritate jubemus, ut ad hos
errores a Sancta Ecclesia arcendos et eliminandos, atque
purissimaB fidei lucem pandendam studium et operam conferant.

Quoniam vero satis non est, ha3reticam pravitatem devitare,
nisi ii quoque errores diligenter fugiantur, qui ad illam plus
minusve accedunt ; omnes officii monemus, servandi etiam
Constitutions et Decreta, quibus pravse ejusmodi opiniones, qua9
isthic diserte non enumerantur, ab hac Sancta Sede prescript®
et prohibits sunt.

Datum Roma3 in publica Sessione in Yaticana Basilica solem-
niter celebrata anno Incarnationis Dominicse millesimo octingeii-
tesimo septuagesimo, die vigesima quarta Aprilis.
Pontificatus Nostri anno vigesimo quarto.

Ita est.

JOSEPHUS,

JSpiscopua 8. Hippolyti,

Secretarius Concilii Vaticani.

TRANSLATION.

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE
CATHOLIC FAITH.

PIUS, BISHOP, SERVANT OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD, WITH
THE APPROVAL OF THE SACRED COUNCIL, FOR PER-
PETUAL REMEMBRANCE.

OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God, and Kedeemer of Man-
kind, before returning to his heavenly Father, promised that He
would be with the Church Militant on earth all days, even to
the consummation of the world. Therefore, He has never ceased

APPENDIX. 193

to be present with His beloved Spouse, to assist her when teach-
ing, to bless her when at work, and to aid her when in danger. And
this His salutary providence, which has been constantly displayed
by other innumerable benefits, has been most manifestly proved
by the abundant good results which Christendom has derived
from CEcumenical Councils, and particularly from that of Trent,
although it was held in evil times. For, as a consequence, the
sacred doctrines of the faith have been denned more closely, and
set forth more fully, errors have been condemned and restrained,
ecclesiastical discipline has been restored and more firmly secured^
the love of learning and of piety has been promoted among the
clergy, colleges have been established to educate youth for the
sacred warfare, and the morals of the Christian world have been
renewed by the more accurate training of the faithful, and by the
more frequent use of the sacraments. Moreover, there has re-
sulted a closer communion of the members with the visible head,
an increase of vigour in the whole mystical body of Christ, the
multiplication of religious congregations and of other institutions
of Christian piety, and such ardour in extending the kingdom of
Christ throughout the world, as constantly endures, even to the
sacrifice of life itself.

But while we recall with due thankfulness these and other
signal benefits which the divine mercy has bestowed on the
Church, especially by the last CEcumenical Council, we cannot
restrain our bitter sorrow for the grave evils, which are princi-
pally due to the fact that the authority of that sacred Synod has
been contemned, or its wise decrees neglected, by many.

No one is ignorant that the heresies proscribed by the Fathers
of Trent, by which the divine magisterium of the Church was
rejected, and all matters regarding religion were surrendered to
the judgment of each individual, gradually became dissolved into
many sects, which disagreed and contended with one another,
until at length not a few lost all faith in Christ. Even the Holy
Scriptures, which had previously been declared the sole source
and judge of Christian doctrine, began to be held no longer as
divine, but to be ranked among the fictions of mythology.

Then there arose, and too widely overspread the world, that
doctrine of rationalism, or naturalism, which opposes itself in
every way to the Christian religion as a supernatural institution,
and works with the utmost zeal in order that, after Christ, our
sole Lord and Saviour, has been excluded from the minds of men,
and from the life and moral acts of nations, the reign of what they
call pure reason or nature may be established. And after for-

194 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

salving and rejecting the Christian religion, and denying the true
God and His Christ, the minds of many have sunk into the abyss
of Pantheism, Materialism, and Atheism, until, denying rational
nature itself and every sound rule of right, they labour to destroy
the deepest foundations of human society.

Unhappily, it has yet further come to pass that, while this im-
piety prevailed on every side, many even of the children of the
Catholic Church have strayed from the path of true piety, and
by the gradual diminution of the truths they held, the Catholic
sense became weakened in them. For, led away by various and
strange doctrines, utterly confusing nature and grace, human
science and divine faith, they are found to deprave the true
sense of the doctrines which our Holy Mother Church holds and
teaches, and endanger the integrity and the soundness of the faith.

Considering these things, how can the Church fail to be deeply
stirred? For, even as God wills all men to be saved, and to
arrive at the knowledge of the truth ; even as Christ came to
save what had perished, and to gather together the children of
God who had been dispersed, so the Church, constituted by God
the mother and teacher of nations, knows its own office as debtor
to all, and is ever ready and watchful to raise the fallen, to sup-
port those who are falling, to embrace those who return, to con-
firm the good and to carry them on to better things. Hence, it
can never forbear from witnessing to and proclaiming the truth of
God, which heals all things, knowing the words addressed to it :
* My Spirit that is in thee, and my words that I have put in thy
mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, from henceforth and
for ever' (Isaias lix. 21).

We, therefore, following the footsteps of our predecessors,
have never ceased, as becomes our supreme Apostolic office, from
teaching and defending Catholic truth, and condemning doctrines
of error. And now, with the Bishops of the whole world assem-
bled round us and judging with us, congregated loy our authority,
and in the Holy Spirit, in this (Ecumenical Council, we, supported
by the Word of God written and handed down as we received it
from the Catholic Church, preserved with sacredness and set
forth according to truth, — have determined to profess and declare
the salutary teaching of Christ from this Chair of Peter and in
sight of all, proscribing and condemning, by the power given to
us of God, all errors contrary thereto.'

APPENDIX. 195

CHAPTER I.

OF GOD, THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS.

The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church believes and con-
fesses that there is one true and living God, Creator and Lord of
heaven and earth, Almighty, Eternal, Immense, Incomprehensible,
Infinite in intelligence, in will, and in all perfection, who, as being
one, sole, absolutely simple and immutable spiritual substance,
is to be declared as really and essentially distinct from the world,
of supreme beatitude in and from Himself, and ineffably exalted
above all things which exist, or are conceivable, except Himself.

This one only true God, of His own goodness and almighty
power, not for the increase or acquirement 'of His own happiness,
but to manifest His perfection by the blessings which He bestows
on creatures, and with absolute freedom of counsel, created out
of nothing, from the very first beginning of time, both the spiri-
tual and the corporeal creature, to wit, the angelical and the
mundane and afterwards the human creature, as partaking, in a
sense, of both, consisting of spirit and of body.

God protects and governs by His Providence all things which
He hath made, ' reaching from end to end mightily, and ordering
all things sweetly ' (Wisdom viii. 1). For ' all things are bare
and open to His eyes ' (Heb. iv. 13), even those which are yet
to be by the free action of creatures.

CHAPTER II.

OF EEVELATION.

The same Holy Mother Church holds and teaches that God,
the beginning and end of all things, may be certainly known by
the natural light of human reason, by means of created things ;
' for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made '
(Romans i. 20), but that it pleased His wisdom and bounty to
reveal Himself, and the eternal decrees of His will, to mankind
by another and a supernatural way : as the Apostle says, ' God,
having spoken on divers occasions, and many ways, in times past,
to the fathers by the prophets ; last of all, in these days, hath
spoken to us by His Son ' (Hebrews i. 1, 2).

o 2

196 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

It is to be ascribed to this divine revelation, that sucli truths
among things divine as of themselves are not beyond human
reason, can, even in the present condition of mankind, be known
by every one with facility, with firm assurance, and with no
admixture of error. This, however, is not the reason why reve-
lation is to be called absolutely necessary ; but because God of
His infinite goodness has ordained man to a supernatural end,
viz., to be a sharer of divine blessings which utterly exceed the
intelligence of the human mind : for ' eye hath not seen, nor ear
heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things
God hath prepared for them that love Him ' (1 Cor. ii. 9).

Further, this supernatural revelation, according to the univer-
sal belief of the Church, declared by the Sacred Synod of Trent,
is contained in the written, books and unwritten traditions which
have come down to us, having been received by the Apostles
from the mouth of Christ himself, or from the Apostles them-
selves, by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have been transmitted,
as it were, from hand to hand.* And these books of the Old
and New Testament are to be received as sacred and canonical, in
their integrity, with all their parts, as they are enumerated in the
decree of the said Council, and are contained in the ancient Latin
edition of the Vulgate. These the Church holds to be sacred and
canonical, not because, having been carefully composed by mere
human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority,
nor merely because they contain revelation, with no admixture
of error, but because, having been written by the inspiration of the
Holy Ghost they have God for their author, and have been deli-
vered as such to the Church herself.

And as the things which the Holy Synod of Trent decreed
for the good of souls concerning the interpretation of Divine
Scripture, in order to curb rebellious spirits, have been wrongly
explained by some, We, renewing the said decree, declare this to
be their sense, that, in matters of faith and morals, appertaining
to the building up of Christian doctrine, that is to be held as the
true sense of Holy Scripture which our Holy Mother Church hath
held and holds, to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and
interpretation of the Holy Scripture ; and therefore that it is per-
mitted to no one to interpret the Sacred Scripture contrary to
this sense, nor, likewise, contrary to the unanimous consent of
the Fathers.

* Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Session the Fourth. Decree
concerning the Canonical Scriptures.

APPENDIX. 197

CHAPTER III.

ON FAITH.

Man being wholly dependent upon God, as upon his Creator
and Lord, and created reason being absolutely subject to uncreated
truth, we are bound to yield to God, by faith in His revelation,
the full obedience of our intelligence and will. And the Catholic
Church teaches that this faith, which is the beginning of man's
salvation, is a supernatural virtue, whereby, inspired and assisted
by the grace of God, we believe that the things which He has
revealed are true ; not because of the intrinsic truth of the
things, viewed by the natural light of reason, but because of
the authority of God Himself who reveals them, and Who can
neither be deceived nor deceive. For faith, as the Apostle testi-
fies, is ' the substance of things hoped for, the conviction of things
that appear not ' (Hebrews i. II).

Nevertheless, in order that the obedience of our faith might be
in harmony with reason, God willed that to the interior help of
the Holy Spirit, there should be joined exterior proofs of His
revelation ; to wit, divine facts, and especially miracles and pro-
phecies, which, as they manifestly display the omnipotence and
infinite knowledge of God, are most certain proofs of His divine
revelation, adapted to the intelligence of all men. Wherefore,
both Moses and the Prophets, and most especially, Christ our
Lord Himself, showed forth many and most evident miracles and
prophecies ; and of the Apostles we read : ' But they going
forth preached everywhere, the Lord working withal, and con-
firming the word with signs that followed ' (Mark xvi. 20). And
again, it is written : ' We have the more firm prophetical word,
whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light shining in a dark
place' (2 St. Peter i. 19).

But though the assent of faith is by no means a blind action
of the mind, still no man can assent to the Gospel teaching, as is
necessary to obtain salvation, without the illumination and inspi-
ration of the Holy Spirit, who gives to all men sweetness in as-
senting to and believing in the truth.* Wherefore, Faith itself,
even when it does not work by charity, is in itself a gift of
God, and the act of faith is a work appertaining to salvation, by

* Canons of the Second Council of Orange, confirmed by Pope Boniface II.,
A.D. 529, against the Semipelagians, can. vii. See Denzinger's Enchiridion Sum
lolorum, p. 50. Wiirzburg, 1854.

198 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

which man yields voluntary obedience to God Himself, by assent-
ing to and co-operating with His grace, which he is able to resist.

Further, all those things are to be believed with divine and
Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God, written
or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn
judgment, or by her ordinary and universal magisterium, pro-
poses for belief as having been divinely revealed.

And since, without faith, it is impossible to please God, and to
attain to the fellowship of His children, therefore without
faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will any one
obtain eternal life, unless he shall have persevered in faith unto
the end. And, that we may be able to satisfy the obligation of
embracing the true faith and of constantly persevering in it, God
has instituted the Church through His only begotten Son, and
has bestowed on it manifest notes of that institution, that it may
be recognised by all men as the guardian and teacher of the
revealed Word ; for to the Catholic Church alone belong all those
many and admirable tokens which have been divinely established
for the evident credibility of the Christian Faith. Nay, more,
the Church by itself, with its marvellous extension, its eminent
holiness, and its inexhaustible fruitfulness in every good thing,
with its Catholic unity and its invincible stability, is a great and
perpetual motive of credibility, and an irrefutable witness of
its own divine mission.

And thus, like a standard set up unto the nations (Isaias xi. 12),
it both invites to itself those who do not yet believe, and assures
its children that the faith which they profess rests on the most
firm foundation. And its testimony is efficaciously supported
by a power from on high. For our most merciful Lord gives His
grace to stir up and to aid those who are astray, that they may
come to a knowledge of the truth ; and to those whom He has
brought out of darkness into His own admirable light He gives
His grace to strengthen them to persevere in that light, desert-
ing none who desert not Him. Therefore there is no parity
between the condition of those who have adhered to the Catholic
truth by the heavenly gift of faith, and of those who, led by human
opinions, follow a false religion ; for those who have received the
faith under the magisterium of the Church can never have any
just cause for changing or doubting that faith. Therefore, giving
thanks to God the Father who has made us worthy to be
partakers of the lot of the Saints in light, let us not neglect
so great salvation, but with our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author
and finisher of our Faith, let us hold fast the confession of our
hope without wavering. (Hebr. xii. 2, and x. 23.)

APPENDIX. 199

CHAPTER IV.

OF FAITH AN£> REASON.

The Catholic Church, with one consent has also ever held
and does hold that there is a tWofold order of knowledge, distinct
both in principle and also in object ; in principle, because our
knowledge in the one is by natural reason, and in the other by
divine faith ; in object, because, besides those things to which
natural reason can attain, there are proposed to our belief mysteries
hidden in God, which, unless divinely revealed, cannot be known.
Wherefore the Apostle, who testifies that God is known by the
gentiles through created things, still, when discoursing of the
grace and truth which come by Jesus Christ (John i. 17) says :
' We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, a wisdom which is
hidden, which God ordained before the world unto our glory ;
which none of the princes of this world knew . . . but to us
God hath revealed them by His Spirit. For the Spirit searcheth
all things, yea, the deep things of God ' (1 Cor. ii. 7-9). And the
only-begotten Son himself gives thanks to the Father, because
He has hid these things from the wise and prudent, and has
revealed them to little ones (Matt. xi. 25).

Reason, indeed, enlightened by faith, when it seeks earnestly,
piously, and calmly, attains by a gift from God. some, and that a
very fruitful, understanding of mysteries ; partly from the analogy
of those things which it naturally knows, partly from the relations
which the mysteries bear to one another and to the last end of
man ; but reason never becomes capable of apprehending mysteries
as it does those truths which constitute its proper object. For
the divine mysteries by their own nature so far transcend the
created intelligence that, even when delivered by revelation and
received by faith, they remain covered with the veil of faith
itself, and shrouded in a certain degree of darkness, so long as we
are pilgrims in this mortal life, not yet with God ; ' for we walk
by faith and not by sight' (2 Cor. v. 7).

But although faith is above reason, there can never be any
real discrepancy between faith and reason, since the same God
who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of
reason on the human mind, and God cannot deny Himself, nor
can truth ever contradict truth. The false appearance of such a
contradiction is mainly due, either to the dogmas of faith not
having been understood and expounded according to the mind of
the Church, or to the inventions of opinion having been taken for

200 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

the verdicts of reason. We define, therefore, that every asser-
tion contrary to a truth of enlightened faith is utterly false.*
Further, the Church, which, together with the Apostolic office of
teaching, has received a charge to guard the deposit of faith,
derives from God the right and the duty of proscribing false science,
lest any should be deceived by philosophy and vain fallacy (Coloss.
ii. 8). Therefore all faithful Christians are not only forbidden to
defend, as legitimate conclusions of science, such opinions as are
known to be contrary to the doctrines of faith, especially if they
have been condemned by the Church, but are altogether bound
to account them as errors which put on the fallacious appearance
of truth.

And not only can faith and reason never be opposed to one
another, but they are of mutual aid one to the other ; for right
reason demonstrates the foundations of faith, and, enlightened by
its light, cultivates the science of things divine ; while faith frees
and guards reason from errors, and furnishes it with manifold
knowledge. So far, therefore, is the Church from opposing the
cultivation of human arts and sciences, that it in many ways
helps and promotes it. For the Church neither ignores nor
despises the benefits to human life which result from the arts
and sciences, but confesses that, as they came from God, the
Lord of all science, so, if they be rightly aused, they lead to God by
the help of His grace. ISTor does the Church forbid that each of
these sciences in its sphere should make use of its own principles
and its own method ; but, while recognising this just liberty, it
stands watchfully on guard, lest sciences, setting themselves
against the divine teaching, or transgressing their own limits,
should invade and disturb the domain of faith.

For the doctrine of faith which God hath revealed has not
been proposed, like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by
human ingenuity, but has been delivered as a divine deposit to
the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared.
Hence also, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to
be retained which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared ;
nor is that meaning ever to be departed from, under the pretence
or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them. Let, then, the
intelligence, science, and wisdom of each and all, of individuals
and of the whole Church, in all ages and all times, increase and

* From the Bull of Pope Leo X., Apostolici regiminis, read in the VIII.
Session of the Fifth Lateran Council, A.D. 1513. See Labbe's Councils, vol.xix.
p. 842, Venice, 1732

APPENDIX. 201

flourish in abundance and vigour ; but simply in its own proper
kind, that is to say, in one and the same doctrine, one and
the same sense, one and the same judgment (Vincent, of Lerins,
Common, n. 28).

CANONS.
I.

Of God, the Creator of all things.

1. If any one shall deny One true God, Creator and Lord of
things visible and invisible ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall not be ashamed to affirm that, except matter,
nothing exists ; let him be anathema.

3. If any one shall say that the substance and essence of God
and of all things is one and the same ; let him be anathema.

4. If any one shall say that finite things, both corporeal and
spiritual, or at least spiritual, have emanated from the divine
substance ; or that the divine essence by the manifestation and
evolution of itself becomes all things ; or, lastly, that God is
universal or indefinite being, which by determining itself con-
stitutes the universality of things, distinct according to genera,
species and individuals ; let him be anathema.

5. If any one confess not that the world, and all things which are
contained in it, both spiritual and material, have been, in their
whole substance, produced by God out of nothing; or shall say
that God created, not by His will, free from all necessity, but by
a necessity equal to the necessity whereby He loves Himself ; or
shall deny that the world was made for the glory of God ; let him
be anathema.

II.

Of Revelation.

1. If any one shall say that the One true God, our Creator and
Lord, cannot be certainly known by the natural light of human
reason through created things ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that it is impossible or inexpedient that
man should be taught, by divine revelation, concerning God and
the worship to be paid to Him ; let him be anathema.

202 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

3. If any one shall say that man cannot be raised by divine
power to a higher than natural knowledge and perfection, but
can and ought, by a continuous progress, to arrive at length, of
himself, to the possession of all that is true and good ; let him be
anathema.

4. If any one shall not receive as sacred and canonical the Books
of Holy Scripture, entire with all their parts, as the Holy Synod
of Trent has enumerated them, or shall deny that they have been
divinely inspired ; let him be anathema.

III.

Of Faith.

1. If any one shall say that human reason is so independent that
faith cannot be enjoined upon it by God ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that divine faith is not distinguished from
natural knowledge of God and of moral truths, and therefore that
it is not requisite for divine faith that revealed truth be
believed because of the authority of God, Who reveals it; let
him be anathema.

3. If any one shall say that divine revelation cannot be made
credible by outward signs, and therefore that men ought to be
moved to faith solely by the internal experience of each, or by
private inspiration ; let him be anathema.

4. If any one shall say that miracles are impossible, and there-
fore that all the accounts regarding them, even those contained in
Holy Scripture, are to be dismissed as fabulous or mythical ; or that
miracles can never be known with certainty, and that the divine
origin of Christianity cannot be proved by them ; let him be
anathema.

5. If any one shall say that the assent of Christian faith is not
a free, act, but inevitably produced by the arguments of human
reason ; or that the grace of God is necessary for that living
faith only which worketh by charity ; let him be anathema.

6. ' If any one shall say that the condition of the faithful, and of
those who have not yet attained to the only true faith, is on a par,
so that Catholics may have just cause for doubting, with suspended
assent, the faith which they have already received under the
magisterium of the Church, until they shall have obtained a
scientific demonstration of the credibility and truth of their faith ;
let him be anathema.

APPENDIX. ^ 203

IY.

Of Faith and Reason.

1. If any one shall say that in divine revelation there are no
mysteries, truly and properly so called, but that all the doctrines
of faith can be understood and demonstrated from natural princi-
ples, by properly cultivated reason ; let him be anathema.

2. If any one shall say that human sciences are to be so freely
treated, that their assertions, although opposed to revealed doc-
trine, are to be held as true, and cannot be condemned by the
Church ; let him be anathema.

3. If any one shall assert it to be possible that sometimes, ac-
cording to the progress of science, a sense is to be given to doc-
trines propounded by the Church different from that which the
Church has understood and understands ; let him be anathema.

Therefore We, fulfilling the duty of our supreme pastoral office,
entreat, by the mercies of Jesus Christ, and, by the authority of
the same our Grod and Saviour, We command, all the faithful of
Christ, and especially those who are set over others, or are
charged with the office of instruction, that they earnestly and
diligently apply themselves to ward off, and eliminate, these
errors from Holy Church, and to spread the light of pure faith.

And since it is not sufficient to shun heretical pravity, unless
those errors also be diligently avoided which more or less nearly
approach it, We admonish all men of the further duty of observing
those constitutions and decrees by which such erroneous opinions
as are not here specifically enumerated, have been proscribed and
condemned by this Holy See.

Given at Rome in public Session solemnly held in the Vatican
Basilica in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
seventy, on the twenty-fourth day of April, in the twenty-fourth
year of our Pontificate.

In conformity with the o

JOSEPH, Bishop of 8. Polfen,

Secretary of the Vatican Council.

204 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

TEXT OF THE CONSTITUTIONS.

CONSTITYTIO DOGMATICA PRIMA DE ECCLESIA
CHEISTI.

PIVS EPISCOPVS SERVVS SEEVORVM DEI SACRO

APPROBANTE CONCILIO AD PERPETVAM

REI MEMORIAM.

PASTOE aeternuset episcopus animarumnostrarum,ut salutiferum
redemptionis opus perenne redderet, sanctam aedificare Ecclesiam
decrevit, in qua veluti in domo Dei viventis fideles omnes unius
fidei et charitatis vinculo continerentur. Quapropter, priusquam
clarificaretur, rogavit Patrem non pro Apostolis tantum, sed et
pro eis, qui credituri erant per verbum eorum in ipsum, ut omnes
unum essent, sicut ipse Filius et Pater unum sunt. Quemad-
modum igitur Apostolos, quos sibi de mundo elegerat, misit sicut
ipse missus erat a Patre : ita in Ecclesia sua Pastores et Doctores
usque ad consummationem saeculi esse voluit. Ut vero episco-
patus ipse unus et indivisus esset, et per cohaerentes sibi invicem
sacerdotes credentium multitudo universa in fidei et communi-
onis unitate conservaretiir, beatum Petrum caeteris Apostolis
praeponens in ipso instituit perpetuum utriusque unitatis princi-
pium ac visibile fundamentum, super cuius fortitudinem aeternum
exstrueretur templum, et Ecclesiae coelo inferenda sublimitas in
huius fidei firmitate consurgeret.* Et quoniam portae inferi ad
evertendam, si fieri posset, Ecclesiam contra eius fundamentum
divinitus positum maiori in dies odio undique insurgunt ; Nos ad
catholici gregis custodiam, incolumitatem, augmentuni, neces-
sarium esse iudicamus, sacro approbante Concilio, doctrinam de
institutione, perpetuitate, ac natura sacri Apostolici primatus, in
quo totius Ecclesiae vis ac soliditas consistit, cunctis fidelibus
credendam et tenendam, secundum antiquam atque constantem
universalis Ecclesiae fidem, proponere, atque contraries, dominico
gregi adeo perniciosos errores proscribere et condemnare.

* S. Leo M. Serm. iv. (al. iii.) cap. 2, in diem Natalis sui.

APPENDIX. 205

CAPUT I.

DE APOSTOLICI PKIMATUS IN BEATO PETRO INSTITUTIONS.

Docemus itaque et declaramus, iuxta Evangelii testimonia,
primatum iurisdictionis in umversam Dei Ecclesiam immediate
et directe beato Petro Apostolo promissum atque collatum a
Christo Domino fuisse. Unum enim Simonem, cui iam pridem
dixerat : Tu vocaberis Cephas,* postquam ille suam edidit
confessionem inquiens : Tu es Christus, Filius Dei vivi, solem-
nibus his verbis allocutus est Dominus : Beatus es Simon Bar-
lona : quia caro et sanguis non revelavit tibi, sed Pater meus,
qui in coelis est: et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super
hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portae inferi non
praevalebunt adversus earn : et tibi dabo claves regni coelorum :
et quodcumque ligaveris super terram, erit ligatum et in coelis :
et quodcumque solveris super terram, erit solutum et in coelis. f
Atque uni Simoni Petro contulit lesus post suam resurrectionem
summi pastoris et rectoris iurisdictionem in totum suum ovile,
dicens : Pasce agnos meos : Pasce oves meas. £ Huic tarn
manifestae sacrarum Scripturarum doctrinae, ut ab Ecclesia
catholica semper intellecta est, aperte opponuntur pravae eorum
sententiae, qui constitutam a Christo Domino in sua Ecclesia
regiminis formam pervertentes negant, solum Petrum prae caeteris
Apostolis, sive seorsum singulis sive omnibus simul, vero pro-
prioque iurisdictionis primatu fuisse a Christo instructum ; aut
qui affirmant, eundem primatum non immediate, directeque ipsi
beato Petro, sed Ecclesiae, et per hanc illi ut ipsius Ecclesiae
ministro delatum fuisse.

Si quis igitur dixerit, beatum Petrum Apostolum non esse a
Christo Domino constitutum Apostolorum omnium principem et
totius Ecclesiae militantis visibile caput ; vel eundem honoris
tantum, non autem verae propriaeque iurisdictionis primatum ab
eodem Domino nostro lesu Christo directe et immediate ac-
cepisse ; anathema sit.

* loan. i. 42. f Matth. xvi. 16-19.

loan. xxi. 15-17.

206 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

CAPUT II.

DE PERPETUITATE PRIMATUS BEATI PETRI IN ROMANIS PONTIFICIBUS.

Quod autem in beato Apostolo Petro princeps pastorum et
pastor magnus ovium Dominus Christus lesus in perpetuam
salutem ac perenne bonnm Ecclesiae instituit, id eodem auctore
in Ecclesiae, quae fundata super petram ad finem saeculorum
usque firma stabit, iugiter durare necesse est. ISTulli sane dubium,
imo saeculis omnibus notum est, quod sanctus beatissimusque
Petrus, Apostolorum princeps et caput, ndeique columna et
Ecclesiae catholicae fundamentum, a Domino nostro lesu Christo,
Salvatore humani generis ac Redemptore, claves regni accepit :
qui ad hoc usque tempus et semper in suis successoribus, epi-
scopis sanctae Romanae Sedis, ab ipso fundatae, eiusque conse-
cratae sanguine, vivet et praesidet et indicium exercet.* Unde
quicumque in hac cathedra Petro succedit, is secundum Christi
ipsius institutionem primatum Petri in universam Ecclesiam
obtinet. Manet ergo dispositio veritatis, et beatus Petrus in
accepta fortitudine petraea perse verans suscepta Ecclesiae
gubernacula non reliquit.f Hac de causa ad Bomanam Ecclesiam
propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse semper fait omnem
convenire Ecclesiam, hoc est, eos, qui sunt undique fideles, ut
in ea Sede, e qua venerandae communionis iura in omnes
dimanant, tamquam membra in capite consociata, in unam cor-
poris compagem coalescerent.J

Si quis ergo dixerit, non esse ex ipsius Christi Domini institu-
tione sen iure divino, ut beatus Petrus in primatu super universam
Ecclesiam habeat perpetuos successores ; aut Romanum Ponti-
ficem non esse beati Petri in eodem primatu successorem ;
anathema sit.

CAPUT III.

DE VI ET RATIONS PRIMATUS ROMANI PONTIFIClS.

Quapropter apertis innixi sacrarum litterarum testimoniis, et
iiihaerentes turn Praedecessorum Nostrorum, Eomanorum Ponti-
ficum, tumConciliorumgeneraliuni disertis, perspicuisque decretis,

* Cf. Ephesini Concilii Act. iii.
t S. Leo M. Serm. iii. (al. ii.) cap. 3.

| S. Iren. Adv. Haer. 1. iii. c. 3, et Cone. Aquilei. a. 381. inter epp. S.
Ambros. ep. xi.

APPENDIX. 207

innovamus oecumenici Concilii Florcntlni definitionem, qua crc-
dendum ab omnibus Christi fidelibus est, sanctam Apostolicam
Sedem, et Romanum Pontificem in universum orbem tenere
primatum, et ipsum Pontificem Bomanum successorem esse beati
Petri Principis Apostolorum,.et verum Christi Vicarium, totius-
que Ecclesiae caput, et omnium Christi an orum patrem ac doctorem
existere ; et ipsi in beato Petro pascendi, regendi ac gubernandi
universalem Ecclesiam a Domino nostro lesu Christo plenam
potestatem traditam esse ; quemadmodum etiam in gestis oeeu-
menicorum Conciliorum et in sacris canonibus continetur.

Docemus proinde et declaramus, Ecclesiam E-omanarn dis-
ponente Domino super omnes alias ordiiiariae potestatis obtinere
principatum, et hanc Romani Pontificis iurisdictionis potestatem,
quae vere episcopalis est, immediatam esse : erga quam cuiuscum-
que ritus et dignitatis pastores atque fideles, tarn seorsum singuli
quam simul omnes, omcio hierarchicae subordinations, veraeque
obedientiae obstringuntur, non solum in rebus, quae ad fidem et
mores, sed etiam in iis, quae ad disciplinam et regimen Ecclesiae
per totum orbem diffusae pertinent ; ita utcustodita cum Romano
Pontifice tarn communionis, quam eiusdem fidei professionis
unitate, Ecclesia Christi sit unus grex sub uno summo pastore.
Haec est catholicae verifcatis doctrina, a qua deviare salva fide
atque salute nemo potest.

Tantum autem abest, ut haec Summi Pontificis potestas officiat
ordinariae ac immediatae illi episcopalis iurisdictionis potestati,
qua Episcopi, qui positi a Spiritu Sancto in Apostolorum locum
successerunt, tamquam veri pastores assignatos sibi greges, sin-
guli singulos, pascunt et regunt, ut eadem a supremo et nniver-
sali Pastore asseratur, roboretur ac vindicetur, secundum illud
sancti Gregorii Magni : Meus honor est honor universalis Eccle-
siae. Meus honor est fratrum meorum solidus vigor. Turn
ego vere honoratus sum, cum singulis quibusque honor debitus
non negatur.*

Porro ex suprema ilia Romani Pontificis potestate gubernandi
universam Ecclesiam ius eidemesseconsequitur,inhuiussuimuneris
exercitio libere communicandi cum pastoribus et gregibus totius
Ecclesiae, ut iidem ab ipso in via salutis doceri ac regi possint.
Quare damnamus ac reprobamus illorum sententias, qui hanc
supremi capitis cum pastoribus et gregibus communicationem
licite impediri posse dicunt, aut eandem reddunt saeculari potes-
tati obnoxiam, ita ut contendant, quae ab Apostolica Sede vel eiu.s

* Ep. ad. Eulog. Alexandria. 1. viii. ep. xxx.

208 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

auctoritate ad regimen Ecclesiae cons tit uuntur, vim ac valorem
non liabere, nisi potestatis saecularis placito coiifirmentur.

Et quoniam divino Apostolici primatus iure Romanus Pontifex
universae Ecclesiae praeest, docemus etiam et declaramus, eum
esse iudicem supremum fidelium,* etin omnibus causis ad examen
ecclesiasticum spectantibus ad ipsius posse indicium recnrri ;•)•
Sedis vero Apostolicae, cuins anctoritate maior non est, indicium
a nemine fore retractandum, neque cuiquam de eius licere iudi-
care iudicio.f Quare a recto veritatis tramite aberrant, qui
affirmant, licere ab iudiciis Romanorum Pontificum ad Oecumen-
icum Concilium tamquaui ad auctoritatem Romano Pontifice
superiorem appellare.

Si quis itaque dixerit, R/omanum Pontificem liabere tantum-
modo officium inspectionis vel directionis, non autem plenam et
supremam potestatem iurisdictionis in universam Ecclesiam, non
solum in rebus, quae ad fidem et mores, sed etiam in iis, quae ad
disciplinam et regimen Ecclesiae per totum orbem diffusae per-
tinent ; aut eum liabere tantum potiores partes, non vero totam
plenitudinem hums supremae potestatis ; aut hanc eius potesta-
tem non esse ordinariam et immediatam sive in omnes ac singulas
ecclesias, sive in omnes et singulos pastores et fideles ; ana-
thema sit.

CAPUT IV.

DE ROMANI PONTIFICIS INFALLIBILI MAGISTERIO.

Ipso autem Apostolico primatu, quern Roman us Pontifex tam-
quam Petri principis Apostolorum successor in universam Eccle-
siam obtinet, supremam quoque magisteriipotestatem comprehendi,
haec Sancta Sedes semper tenuit, perpetuus Ecclesiae usus com-
probat, ipsaque oecumenica Concilia, ea imprimis, in quibus
Oriens cum Occidente in fidei charitatisque unionem conveniebat,
declaraverunt. Patres enim Concilii Constantinopolitani quarti,
maiorum vestigiis inhaerentes, hanc solemnem ediderunt pro-
fessionem : Prima salus est, rectae fidei regulam custodire. Et
quia non potest Domini nostri lesu Christi praetermitti sententia
dicentis : Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam
meam, haec, quae dicta sunt, rerum probantur effectibus, quia in

* Pii PP. VI. Breve, Super soliditate. d. 28 Nov. 1786.

f Concil. Oecum. Lugdun. II.

j Ep. Nicolai I. ad Michaelem Imperatorem.

APPENDIX.

209

Sede Apostolica imraaculata est semper catholica reservata religio,
et sancta celebrata doctrina. Ab huius ergo fide et doctrina
separari minime cupientes, speramus, ut in una communione,
quam Sedes Apostolica praedicat, esse mereamur, in qua est
Integra et vera Christianae religionis soliditas.* Approbante
vero Lugdunensi Concilio secundo, Graeci professi sunt : Sanctam
Bomanam Ecclesiam summum et plenum primatum et principa-
tum super universam Ecclesiam catliolicam obtinere, quern se ab
ipso Domino in beato Petro Apostolorum principe sive vertice,
cuius Bomanus Pontifex est successor, cum potestatis plenitudine
recepisse veraciter et humiliter recognoscit; et sicut prae caeteris
tenetur fidei veritatem defendere, sic et, si quae de fide subortae
fuerint quaestiones, suo debeiit iudicio definiri. Florentinum
denique Concilium definivit: Pontificem Bomanum, verum Christi
Vicarium, totiusque Ecclesiae caput et omnium Christianorum
patrem ac doctorem existere ; et ipsi in beato Petro pascendi,
regendi ac gubernandi universalern. Ecclesiam a Domino nostro
Jesu Christo plenam potestatem traditam esse.

Huic pastorali muneri ut satisfacerent, Praedecessores Nostri.
indefessam semper operam dederunt, ut salutaris Christi doctrina
apud omnes terrae populus propagaretur, parique cura vigilarunt,
ut, ubi recepta esset, sincera et pura conservaretur. Quocirca
totius orbis Antistites nunc singuli, nunc in Synodis congregati,
longam ecclesiarum consuetudinem et antiquae regulae formam
sequentes, ea praesertim pericula, quae in negotiis fidei emergebant,
ad hanc Sedeni Apostolicam retulerunt, ut ibi potissimum resar-
cirentur damna fidei, ubi fides non potest sentire defectum.f
Bomani autem Pontifices, prout temporum et rerum conditio
suadebat, nunc convocatis oecumenicis Conciliis aut explorata
Ecclesiae per orbem dispersae sententia, nunc per Synodos par-
ticulares, nunc aliis, quae divina suppeditabat providentia,
adhibitis auxiliis, ea tenenda definiverunt, quae sacris Scripturis
et apostolicis Traditionibus consentanea Deo adiutore cognoverant.
Neque enim Petri successoribus Spiritus Sanctus promissus est,
ut eo revelante novam doctrinam patefacerent, sed ut eo assistente
traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum sancte
custodirent et fideliter exponerent. Quorum quidem apostolicam
doctrinam omnes venerabiles Patres amplexi et sancti Doctores
orthodoxi venerati atque secuti sunt ; plenissime scientes, hanc

* Ex formula S. Hormisdae Papae, prout ab Hadriano II. Patribus Concilii
Oecumenici VIII., Constautinopolitani IV., proposita et ab iisdem sub-
scripta est.

f Cf. S. Bern. Epist. cxc.

210 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

sancfci Petri Sedem ab omni semper errore illibatam permanere,
secundum Domini Salvatoris nostri divinam pollicitationem dis-
cipulorum suorum principi factam : Ego rogavi pro te, ut non
deficiat fides tua, et tu aliquando conversus confirma fratres
tuos.

Hoc igitur veritatis et fidei numquam deficientis charisma
Petro eiusque in hac Cathedra successoribns divinitus collatum
est, ut excelso suo nmnere in omnium salutem fungerentur, ut
universus Christi grex per eos ab erroris veneriosa esca aversus,
coelestis docfcrinae pabulo nutriretur, ut sublata schismatis occa-
sione Ecclesia tota una conservaretur, atque suo fundamento
innixa firma adversus inferi portas consisteret.

Atvero cum hac ipsa aetate, qua salutifera Apostolici muneris
efficacia vel maxime requiritur, non pauci inveniantur, qui illius
auctoritati obtrectant ; necessarium omnino esse censemus,
praerogativam, quam unigenitus Dei Filius cum summo pastorali
officio coniungere dignatus est, solemniter asserere.

Itaque Nos traditioni a fidei Christianae exordio perceptae
fideliter inhaerendo, ad Dei Salvatoris nostri gloriam, religionis
Catholicae exaltationem et Christianorum populorum salutem,
sacro approbanfce Concilio, docemus et divinitus revelatum dogma
esse definimus : Romanum Pontificem, cum ex Cathedra loquitur,
id est, cum omnium Christianorum Pastoris et Doctoris munere
fungens, pro suprema sua Apostolica auctoritate doctrinam de
fide vel moribus ab universa Ecclesia tenendam definit, per
assistentiam divinam, ipsi in beato Petro promissam, ea infallibili-
fcate pollere, qua divinus Redemptor Ecclesiam suam in definienda
doctrina de fide vel moribus instructam esse vomit ; ideoque
eiusmodi Romani Pontincis definitiones ex sese, non autem ex
consensu Ecclesiae irreformabiles esse.

Si quis autem huic Nostrae definitioni contradicere, quod Deus
avertat, praesumpserit ; anathema sit,

Datum Romae, in publica Sessione in Vaticana Basilica solem-
niter celebrata anno Incarnationis Dominicae millesimo octin-
gentesimo septuagesimo, die decima octava lulii.

Pontificatus Nostri anno vigesimo quinto.

Ita est.

JOSEPHUS, Episcopus 8. Ippolyti,

Secretarius Concilii Vaticani.

APPENDIX. 211

TRANSLATION.

FIRST DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
OF CHRIST.

PUBLISHED IN THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE HOLT (ECUMENICAL
COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN.

PIUS BISHOP, SERVANT OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD, WITH THE
APPROVAL OF THE SACRED COUNCIL, FOR AN EVERLAST-
ING REMEMBRANCE.

THE Eternal Pastor and Bishop of our souls, in order to continue
for all time the life-giving work of His Redemption, determined
to build up the Holy Church, wherein, as in the House of the
living God, all who believe might be united in the bond of one
faith and one charity. Wherefore, before He entered into His
glory, He prayed unto the Father, not for the Apostles only, but
for those also who through their preaching should come to believe
in Him, that all might be one even as He the Son and the Father
are one.* As then He sent the Apostles whom He had
chosen to Himself from the world, as He Himself had been
sent by the Father : so He willed that there should ever be
pastors and teachers in His Church to the end of the world.
And in order that the Episcopate also might be one and un-
divided, and that by means of a closely united priesthood the
multitude of the faithful might be kept secure in the oneness of
faith and communion, He set Blessed Peter over the rest of the
Apostles, and fixed in him the abiding principle of this two-fold
unity, and its visible foundation, in the strength of which the
everlasting temple should arise and the Church in the firmness
of that faith should lift her majestic front to Heaven. "\ And
seeing that the gates of hell with daily increase of hatred are
gathering their strength on every side to upheave the foundation
laid by God's own hand, and so, if that might be, to overthrow
the Church : We, therefore, for the preservation, safe-keeping,
and increase of the Catholic flock, with the approval of the
Sacred Council, do judge it to be necessary to propose to the

* St. John xvii. 21.

e f From Sermon iv. chap. ii. of St. Leo the Great, A..D. 440, vol. i. p. 17 of
edition of Ballerini, Venice, 1753: read in the eighth lection on the Feast of
St. Peter's Chair at Antioch, February 22.

p 2

212 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

belief and acceptance of all the faithful, in accordance with the
ancient and constant faith of the universal Church, the doctrine
touching the institution, perpetuity, and nature of the sacred
Apostolic Primacy, in which is found the strength and solidity
of the entire Church, and at the same time to proscribe and con-
demn the contrary errors, so hurtful to the flock of Christ*

CHAPTER I.

OF THE INSTITUTION OF THE APOSTOLIC PEIMACY IN BLESSED PETER.

We therefore teach and declare that, according to the testimony
of the Gospel, the primacy of jurisdiction over the universal
Church of God was immediately and directly promised and given
to Blessed Peter the Apostle by Christ the Lord. For it was to
Simon alone, to whom He had already said : Thou shalt be
called Cephas,* that the Lord after the confession made by him,
saying : Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, ad-
dressed these solemn words : Blessed art thou, Simon Bar- Jona,
because flesh and blood have not revealed it to thee, but my
Father who is in Heaven. And I say to thee that thou art
Peter ; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the
keys of the kingdom of Heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind
upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. | And it was
upon Simon alone that Jesus after His resurrection bestowed the
jurisdiction of Chief Pastor and Ruler over all His fold in the
words : Feed my lambs : feed my sheep 4 At open variance
with this clear doctrine of Holy Scripture as it has been ever
understood by the Catholic Church are the perverse opinions of
those who, while they distort the form of government established
by Christ the Lord in His Church, deny that Peter in his single
person, preferably to all the other Apostles, whether taken sepa-
rately or together, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper
primacy of jurisdiction ; or of those who assert that the same
primacy was not bestowed immediately and directly upon Blessed
Peter himself, but upon the Church, and through the Church on
Peter as her Minister.

* St. John i. 42. f St. Matthew xvi. 16-19. } St. John xxi. 15-17.

APPENDIX. 213

If anyone, therefore, shall say that Blessed Peter the Apostle
was not appointed the Prince of all the Apostles and the visible
Head of the whole Church Militant ; or that the same directly
and immediately received from the same Our Lord Jesus Christ
a primacy of honour only, and not of true and proper jurisdic-
tion ; let him be anathema.

CHAPTER II.

ON THE PEEPETUITY OF THE PRIMACY OP BLESSED PETER IN THE
ROMAN PONTIFFS.

That which the Prince of Shepherds and great Shepherd of the
sheep, Jesus Christ our Lord, established in the person of the
Blessed Apostle Peter to secure the perpetual welfare and lasting
good of the Church, must, by the same institution, necessarily
remain unceasingly in the Church ; which, being founded upon
the Rock, will stand firm to the end of the world. For none
can doubt, and it is known to all ages, that the holy and Blessed
Peter, the Prince and Chief of the Apostles, the pillar of the
faith and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys
of the kingdom from Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Saviour and
Redeemer of mankind, and lives, presides, and judges, to this
day and always, in his successors the Bishops of the Holy See of
Rome, which was founded by him, and consecrated by his blood.*
"Whence, whosoever succeeds to Peter in this See, does by the
institution of Christ Himself obtain the Primacy of Peter over
the whole Church. The disposition made by Incarnate Truth
therefore remains, and Blessed Peter, abiding through the
strength of the Rock in the power that he received, has not
abandoned the direction of the Church, f Wherefore it has at
all times been necessary that every particular Church — that is to
say, the faithful throughout the world — should agree with the
Roman Church, on account of the greater authority of the
princedom which this has received ; that all being associated in
the unity of that See whence the rights of communion spread to

* From the Acts (session third) of the Third General Cotincil of Ephesus,
A.D. 431, Labbe's Councils, vol. iii. p. 1154, Venice edition of 1728. See also
letter of St. Peter Chrysologus to Eutyches, in life prefixed to his works, p. 13,
Venice, 1750.

f From Sermon iii. chap. iii. of St. Leo the Great, vol. i. p. 1 2.

214 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

all, might grow together as members of one Head in the compact
unity of the body.*

If, then, any should deny that it is by the institution of Christ
the Lord, or by divine right, that Blessed Peter should have a
perpetual line of successors in the Primacy over the Universal
Church, or that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of Blessed
Peter in this primacy ; let him be anathema.

CHAPTER III.

ON THE POWER AND NATURE OP THE PRIMACY OF THE ROMAN

PONTIFF.

Wherefore, resting on plain testimonies of the Sacred Writings,
and adhering to the plain and express decrees both of our prede-
cessors, the Roman Pontiffs, and of the General Councils, We
renew the definition of the (Ecumenical Council of Florence, in
virtue of which all the faithful of Christ must believe that the
Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff possesses the primacy
over the whole world, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor
of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and is true Vicar of
Christ, and Head of the whole Church, and Father and Teacher
of all Christians ; and that full power was given to him in Blessed
Peter to rule, feed, and govern the Universal Church by Jesus
Christ our Lord : as is also contained in the acts of the General
Councils and in the Sacred Canons.

Hence we teach and declare that by the appointment of our
Lord the Roman Church possesses a superiority of ordinary power
over all other Churches, and that this power of jurisdiction of the
Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate ; to which
all, of whatever rite and dignity, both pastors and faithful, both
individually and collectively, are bound, by their duty of hierar-
chical subordination and true obedience, to submit, not only in
matters which belong to faith and morals, but also in those that
appertain to the discipline and government of the Church through-
out the world, so that the Church of Christ may be one flock
under one supreme pastor through the preservation of unity both
of communion and of profession of the same faith with the

* From St. Irenaeus against Heresies, book iii. cap. iii. p. 175, Benedictine
edition, Venice, 1734; and Acts of Synod of Aquileia, A.D. 381, Labbe's Coun-
cils, vol. ii. p. 1185, Venice, 1728.

APPENDIX. 215

Roman Pontiff. This is the teaching of Catholic truth, from
which no one can deviate without loss of faith and of salvation.

But so far is this power of the Supreme Pontiff from being any
prejudice to the ordinary and immediate power of episcopal
jurisdiction, by which Bishops, who have been set by the Holy
Ghost to succeed and hold the place of the Apostles,* feed and
govern, each his own flock, as true Pastors, that this their
episcopal authority is really asserted, strengthened, and protected
by the supreme and universal Pastor ; in accordance with the
words of St. Gregory the Great : my honour is the honour of the
whole Church. My honour is the firm strength of my brethren.
I am truly honoured, when the honour due to each and all is riot
withheld.f

Further, from this supreme power possessed by the Koman
Pontiff of governing the Universal Church, it follows that he has
the right of free communication with the Pastors of the whole
Church, and with their flocks, that these may be taught and
ruled by him in the way of salvation. Wherefore we condemn
and reject the opinions of those who hold that the communication
between this supreme Head and the Pastors and their flocks can
lawfully be impeded ; or who make this communication subject
to the will of the secular power, so as to maintain that whatever
is done by the Apostolic See, or by its authority, for the govern-
ment of the Church, cannot have force or value unless it be con-
firmed by the assent of the secular power. And since by the
divine right of Apostolic primacy, the Roman Pontiff is placed
over the Universal Church, we further teach and declare that he
is the supreme judge of the faithful, J and that in all causes,
the decision of which belongs to the Church, recourse may be had
to his tribunal, § and that none may re-open the judgment of
the Apostolic See, than whose authority there is no greater,
nor can any lawfully review its judgment. || Wherefore they
err from the right course who assert that it is lawful to appeal
from the judgments of the Roman Pontiffs to an (Ecumenical

* From chap. iv. of xxiii. session of Council of Trent, ' Of the Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy.'

f From the letters of St. Gregory the Great, book viii. 30, vol. ii. p. 919,
Benedictine edition, Paris, 1705.

{ From a Brief of Pius VI. Super soliditate, of November 28, 1786.

§ From the Acts of the Fourteenth General Council of Lyons, A.D. 1274.
Labbe's Councils, vol. xiv. p. 512.

|| From Letter viii. of Pope Nicholas I., A.D. 858, to the Emperor Michael, in
Labbe's Councils, vol. ix. pp. 1339 and 1570.

216 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

Council, aa to an authority higher than that of the Roman
Pontiff.

If then any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office
merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme
power of jurisdiction over the Universal Church, not only in
things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which
relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread
throughout the world ; or assert that he possesses merely the
principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power ; or
that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate,
both over each and all the Churches and over each and all the
Pastors and the faithful ; let him be anathema.

CHAPTER IV.

CONCEBNING THE INFALLIBLE TEACHING OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF.

Moreover, that the supreme power of teaching is also included in
the Apostolic primacy, which the Roman Pontiff, as the successor
of Peter, Prince of the Apostles, possesses over the whole Church,
this Holy See has always held, the perpetual practice of the
Church confirms, and CEcumenical Councils also have declared,
especially those in which the East with the West met in the
union of faith and charity. For the Fathers of the Fourth
Council of Constantinople, following in the footsteps of their
predecessors, gave forth this solemn profession : The first con-
dition of salvation is to keep the rule of the true faith. And
because the sentence of our Lord Jesus Christ cannot be passed
by, who said : Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build
my Church,* these things which have been said are approved
by events, because in the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion and
her holy and well-known doctrine has always been kept undefiled.
Desiring, therefore, not to be in the least degree separated from
the faith and doctrine of that See, we hope that we may deserve
to be in the one communion, which the Apostolic See preaches,
in which is the entire and true solidity of the Christian religion. f
And, with the approval of the Second Council of Lyons,

* St. Matthew xvi. 18.

f From the Formula of St. Hormisdas, subscribed by the Fathers of the
Eighth General Council (Fourth of Constantinople), A.TJ. 869. Labbe's Coun-
cils, vol. v. pp. 583, 622.

APPENDIX. 217

the Greeks professed that the Holy Roman Church enjoys
supreme and full Primacy and preeminence over the whole
Catholic Church, which it truly and humbly acknowledges that
it has received with the plenitude of power from our Lord Him-
self in the person of blessed Peter, Prince or Head of the Apostles,
whose successor the Roman Pontiff is ; and as the Apostolic See
is bound before all others to defend the truth of faith, so also if
any questions regarding faith shall arise, they must be defined by
its judgment.* Finally, the Council of Florence defined : f
That the Roman Pontiff is the true Yicar of Christ, and the
Head of the whole Church, and the Father and Teacher of all
Christians ; and that to him in blessed Peter was delivered by
our Lord Jesus Christ the full power of feeding, ruling, and
governing the whole Church.^

To satisfy this pastoral duty our predecessors ever made un-
wearied efforts that the salutary doctrine of Christ might be
propagated among all the nations of the earth, and with equal
care watched that it might be preserved genuine and pure where
it had been received. Therefore the Bishops of the whole world,
now singly, now assembled in synod, following the long-established
custom of Churches, § and the form of the ancient rule,|| sent
word to this Apostolic See of those dangers especially which
sprang up in matters of faith, that there the losses of faith might
be most effectually repaired where the faith cannot fail.^f And
the Roman Pontiffs, according to the exigencies of times and
circumstances, sometimes assembling (Ecumenical Councils, or
asking for the mind of the Church scattered throughout the
world, sometimes by particular Synods, sometimes using other
helps which Divine Providence supplied, defined as to be held
those things which with the help of God they had recognised as
conformable with the Sacred Scriptures and Apostolic Tradi-
tions. For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of
Peter that by His revelation they might make known new

* From the Acts of the Fourteenth General Council (Second of Lyons), A.D.
1274. Labbe, vol. xiv. p. 512.

f From the Acts of the Seventeenth General Council of Florence, A.D. 1438.
Labbe, vol. xviii. p. 526.

J Johnxxi. 15-17.

§ From a letter of St. Cyril of Alexandria to Pope St. Celestine I. A.D. 422,
vol. vi. part ii. p. 36, Paris edition of 1638.

|| From a Eescript of St. Innocent I. to the Council of Milevis, A.D. 402.
Labbe, vol. iii. p. 47.

^[ From a letter of St. Bernard to Pope Innocent II. A.D. 1130. Epist. 191,
vol. iv. p. 433, P-aris edition of 1742.

218 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep
and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith delivered
through the Apostles. And indeed all the venerable Fathers
have embraced and the holy orthodox Doctors have venerated
and followed their Apostolic doctrine ; knowing most fully that
this See of holy Peter remains ever free from all blemish of error
according to the divine promise of the Lord our Saviour made to
the Prince of His disciples : I have prayed for thee that thy faith
fail not, and, when thou art converted, confirm thy brethren.*

This gift, then, of truth and never-failing faith was conferred
by Heaven upon Peter and his successors in this Chair, that they
might perform their high office for the salvation of all ; that the
whole flock of Christ kept away by them from the poisonous food
of error, might be nourished with the pasture of heavenly doc-
trine; that the occasion of schism being removed the whole
Church might be kept one, and, resting on its foundation, might
stand firm against the gates of hell.

But since in this very age, in which the salutary efficacy of the
Apostolic office is most of all required, not a few are found who
take away from its authority, we judge it altogether necessary
solemnly to assert the prerogative which the only-begotten Son
of God vouchsafed to join with the supreme pastoral office.

Therefore faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the
beginning of the Christian faith, for the glory of God Our
Saviour, the exaltation of the Catholic Religion, and the salvation
of Christian people, the Sacred Council approving, We teach and
define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: that the Roman
Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge
of the office of Pastor and Doctor of all Christians, by virtue of
his supreme Apostolic authority he defines a doctrine regarding
faith or morals to be held by the Universal Church, by the divine
assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that
infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that His
Church should be endowed for defining doctrine regarding faith
or morals : and that therefore such definitions of the Roman
Pontiff are irreformable f of themselves, and not from the consent
of the Church.

* St. Luke xsii. 32. See also the Acts of the Sixth General Council, A.D. 680.
Labbe, vol. vii. p. 659.

t i.e. in the words used by Pope Nicholas I. note 13, and in the Synod of
Quedlinburg, A.D. 1085, 'it is allowed to none to revise its judgment, and to
sit in judgment upon what it lias judged.' Labbe, vol. xii. p. 679.

APPENDIX. 219

But if anyone — which may God avert — presume to contradict
this Our definition ; let him be anathema.

Given at Rome in Public Session solemnly held in the Vatican
Basilica in the year of Our Lord One thousand eight hundred
and seventy, on the eighteenth day of July, in the twenty- fifth
year of our Pontificate.

In conformity with the original.

JOSEPH, Bishop of 8. Polten,

Secretary to the Vatican Council.

220 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

RULES LAID DOWN BY THEOLOGIANS FOR
DOCTRINAL DEFINITIONS.

Question. — What are the characters and marks whereby we
may know whether a proposition can be submitted to the authori-
tative judgment of the Catholic magisterium, or in other words,
whether a proposition be definable as defide ?

Answer. — In the answer distinction was made between that
which was sufficient in order to come to a definition, and that
which was not necessary for that purpose.

With respect to that which was not necessary, the following
four points were established unanimously.

1. It is not necessary, that antecedently there should not have
been a variety of opinions in the Catholic Church, and that all
should have agreed in that which is to be defined.

This is manifest from the ancient controversy long ago decided
on re-baptism, although many bishops held the opposite opinion.
This is also confirmed by the practice of the church, which many
times has permitted the profession of opposite opinions, provided
there has been a willingness to submit to any decision that might
be made. This practice supposes that points may be defined,
about which Catholics have been permitted to think and dispute
freely.

2. It is not necessary that no writers of authority should be
cited for an opinion contrary to that which is to be defined. This
is manifest from the history of the dogmas successively defined ;
and in this place it will be sufficient to observe, that the Council
of Trent (sess. vi. can. 23) did not hesitate to affirm as the faith
of the church, that the most Holy Virgin Mother of God had
never committed any even venial sin, although it is certain that
grave doctors and Fathers wrote otherwise.

3. It is not necessary to cite texts, either implicit or explicit,
from Holy Scripture, since it is manifest that the extent of

APPENDIX. 221

revelation is greater than that of Holy Scripture. Thus, it has
been denned, for example, that even infants may and ought to be
baptized, that Christ our Lord is wholly contained and received
under one species of the most Holy Eucharist, that the Holy
Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son as from one prin-
ciple, although theologians do not produce texts either implicit
or explicit from Scripture in which such dogmas are taught.

4. Lastly, it is not necessary to have a series of fathers and
testimonies reaching to apostolic times, in order to prove that
such a proposition belongs to apostolic tradition. With respect
to this, it was observed, that the assertion of cuch a necessity
rests upon false hypotheses, and is refuted by the most palpable
facts.

The false hypotheses are,

a. That all doctrine preached from the beginning has been
committed to writing by the fathers.

b. That all the monuments of antiquity have come down
to us.

. c. That the entire object of faith has always been distinctly
conceived and formally expressed ;

d. That subsequent tradition may differ from the preceding ;

e. That it cannot be legitimately concluded from the fact that
a doctrine is held in any age, that the same doctrine was never
denied by the majority, and that it was at least implicitly believed
by the greater number.

The facts that refute such a necessity are manifold, but it
suffices to mention the definition of Ephesus, of Chalcedon, of the
Lateran Synod under Martin I. or the dogmatical letters of St.
Leo and St. Agatho, in which appeal is made to the faith of the
fathers and to tradition, and where there appears to be no anxiety
to produce testimonies of the first three centuries, on the contrary,
authors are quoted, who in those times were of recent date.

Having thus laid down by common agreement that which was
not necessary, they passed on to discuss what was sufficient in
order that an opinion should be defined as an article of faith.

The five following characters were proposed and decided upon
as being sufficient.

I. A certain number of grave testimonies containing the con-
troverted proposition.

This after thorough discussion was unanimously acknowledged
to be a sufficient character, and it was said that to deny it would
be going against the councils, the dogmatic bulls of pontiffs, and
the economy of the church itself. Thus with a certain number

222 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

of such, testimonies referred to in the acts of the councils, it is
easily seen how the fathers proceeded to a definition at Ephesus
against Nestorius, in the sixth council against the Monothelites,
and in the seventh against the Iconoclasts.

II. One or more revealed principles in which is contained the
proposition in question.

Upon this also the consultors were unanimous, and they more-
over said that the production of such principles would be equi-
valent to a virtual and immediate revelation. Thus, from the
revealed principle that Jesus Christ is perfect God and perfect
man, it follows as revealed that Jesus Christ has two wills : also,
in the revealed principle that God is One and the Divine Persons
three, and that all in God is one except where the relation of
origin intervenes, it is also revealed that the Holy Ghost can
only proceed from the Father and the Son as from one principle
of spiration.

III. The intimate nexus of the dogmas, or, what is the same
thing, that a proposition must be believed to be revealed, from the
denial of which the falsity of one or more articles of faith would
necessarily and immediately follow.

The consultors were unanimous on this point, agreeing that
such a character was equivalent to a virtual and immediate re-
velation. Thus, when it is established that some sins are mortal,
and that not every sin is incompatible with a state of grace, ifc
necessarily follows that the distinction between mortal and venial
sins is a revealed doctrine. So also from the fact that the Sac-
raments produce their effect ex opere operato and that Jesus
Christ is the primary minister of them, it follows as virtually and
immediately revealed, that the effect of the Sacraments does not
depend upon the virtue or malice of the secondary minister.

IV. The concordant testimony of the existing episcopate.
The consultors with regard to this were again unanimous, and

it was said that to deny the sufficiency of this character was to
contradict the promises of our Lord, and the constant practice
of the fathers in proving the articles of faith. Thus, Irenaius,
Tertullian, Augustine, and Fulgentius, in order to put an end to
controversies, considered it sufficient to ascertain the faith of the
Sees and more especially of the chief ones.

V. The practice of the Church.

That this point would afford sufficient evidence to proceed to a
definition, was likewise unanimously affirmed by the consultors.

APPENDIX. 223

VI.

THE CASE OF HONORIUS.

I HAVE intentionally refrained from treating the historical evi-
dence in the case of Honorius in the text of the fourth chapter,
for the following reasons :

1. Because it is sufficient to the argument of that chapter to
affirm that the case of Honorius is doubtful. It is in vain for
the antagonists of Papal Infallibility to quote this case as if it
were certain. Centuries of controversy have established, beyond
contradiction, that the accusation against Honorius cannot be
raised by his most ardent antagonists to more than a probability.
And this probability, at its maximum, is less than that of his
defence. I therefore affirm the question to be doubtful ; which
is abundantly sufficient against the private judgment of his
accusers. The cumulus of evidence for the Infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff outweighs all such doubts.

2. Because the argument of the fourth chapter necessarily ex-
cludes all discussion of detailed facts. Had they been introduced
into the text, our antagonists would have evaded the point, and
confused the argument by a discussion of details. I will, never-
theless, here affirm, that the following points in the case of
Honorius can be abundantly proved from documents :

(1) That Honorius defined no doctrine whatsoever. (2) That
he forbade the making of any new definition. (3) That his
fault was precisely in this omission of Apostolic authority, for
which he was justly censured. (4) That his two epistles are
entirely orthodox ; though, in the use of language, he wrote as
was usual before the condemnation of Monothelitism, and not as
it became necessary afterwards. It is an anachronism and an
injustice to censure his language, used before that condemnation,
as it might be just to censure it after the condemnation had been
made:

To this I add the following excellent passage from the recent
Pastoral of the Archbishop of Baltimore :

224 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

* The case of Honorius forms no exception; for 1st, Honorius
expressly says in his letters to Sergius, that he meant to define
nothing, and he was condemned precisely because he temporized
and would not define ; 2nd, because in his letters he clearly
taught the sound Catholic doctrine, only enjoining silence as to
the use of certain terms, then new in the Church ; and 3rd,
because his letters were not addressed to a general council of the
whole Church, and were rather private, than public and official ;
at least they were not published, even in the East, until several
years later. The first letter was written to Sergius in 633, and
eight years afterwards, in 641, the Emperor Heraclius, in excul-
pating himself to Pope John II., Honorius' successor, for having
published his edict — the Ecthesis — which enjoined silence on the
disputants, similar to that imposed by Honorius, lays the whole
responsibility thereof on Sergius, who, he declares, composed the
edict. Evidently, Sergius had not communicated the letter to
the Emperor, probably because its contents, if published, would
not have suited his wily purpose of secretly introducing, under
another form, the Eutychian heresy. Thus falls to the ground
the only case upon which the opponents of Infallibility have
continued to insist. This entire subject has been exhausted by
many recent learned writers.'

On the question of Yigilius, see Cardinal Orsi De irreform-
abili Rom. Pont, in definiendis fidei controversiis judicio, torn. i. p. i.
capp. 19, 20 ; Jeremias a Benetti's Privileg. 8. Petri vindic. p.
ii. torn. v. art. 12, p. 397, ed. Roman. 1759; Ballerini De vi et
ratione primatus, cap. 15; Lud. Thomassin, Disp. xix. in Condi.-,
Petr. De Marca Diss. de Vigilio ; Yincenzi in S. Gregorii Nyss. et
Origenis scripta cum App. de actis Synodi Y. torn. iv. and v.

On the question of Honorius, amongst older writers : los.
Biner S. J. in Apparatu eruditionis, p. iii. iv. and xi. ; Orsi, op. cit.
capp. 21-28 ; Bellarm. De Rom. Pontif. liv. iv.; Thomassin, op.
cit. diss. xx. ; ISTatalis Alex. Hist. Eccles. Saec. VII. diss. 2. ; Zaccaria
Antifebrom. p. ii. lib. iv. Amongst later authors, see Civilta
cattolica, ann. 1864, ser. v. vol. xi. and xii. ; Schneeman, Studia
in qu. de Honorio ; los. Pennachi de Honorii I. Romani Pontiftcis
causa in Concilio VI.

APPENDIX. 225

VII.

PASTORAL OF THE GERMAN BISHOPS
ASSEMBLED AT FULDA.

* THE undersigned Bishops to the reverend clergy and faithful,
greeting, and peace in the Lord.

' Having returned to our respective Dioceses from the Holy
(Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, we, in union with other
German Bishops who were prevented attending the Council, con-
sider it our duty as your chief pastors to address to you, dearly
beloved in the Lord, a few words of instruction and exhortation.
The occasion and reason for our doing so, and that unitedly and
solemnly, is found in the fact that many erroneous ideas have for
several months beensdisseminated, and still, without any authority,
are striving in many places to gain acceptance.

* In order, then, to maintain the divine truths which Christ our
Lord hath taught mankind in their entire purity, and to secure
them from all change and distortion, He has established in
His Holy Church the office of infallible teaching, and has promised
and also given to it His protection and the assistance of the Holy
Ghost for all times. On this office of infallible teaching of the
Church reposes entire the security and joy of our faith.

' As often as in the course of time misunderstandings of, or
oppositions to, individual points of teaching have sprung up, this
office of infallible teaching has in various ways, at one time in
greater Councils, at another without them, both exposed and
foiled the errors, and declared and established the truth. This
has been done in the most solemn manner by the General
Councils, that is, by those great assemblies in which the Head and
the members of the one teaching body of the Church combined
for the deciding of the doubts and controversies in matters of
faith which then prevailed.

' These decisions, according to the unanimous and undoubted
tradition of the Church, have always been held to be preserved
from error by a supernatural and divine assistance. Hence the

226 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

faithful in all times have submitted themselves to these decisions
as to the infallible expressions of the Holy Ghost Himself, and,
with undoubting faith, have held them to be true. They have
done so, not, as persons might suppose, because the Bishops
were men of mature and extended experience, not because
many of them were versed in all sciences, not because they had
come together from all parts of the world, and therefore, in a
certain sense, brought together the human knowledge of the
whole earth ; not, lastly, because through a long life they had
studied and taught the Word of God, and hence were trust-
worthy witnesses of its meaning. All this indeed gives to their
declarations a very high, indeed perhaps the highest possible,
degree of mere human trustworthiness. Still this is not a
sufficient ground on which to rest supernatural faith. For this
act, in its last resort, rests not on the testimony of men, even
when they are most worthy of confidence, and even if the whole
human race by the voice of its best and most noble representa-
tives should bear witness to it ; but such an act always rests
wholly and alone on the truth of God Himself. When therefore
the children of the Church receive with faith the decrees of a
General Council, they do it with a conviction that God the
Eternal and alone of Himself Infallible Truth co-operates with
it in a supernatural manner, and preserves it from error.

* Such a General Council is the present one which our Holy
Father Pius IX., as you know, convoked in Home, and to which
the successors of the Apostles, in larger numbers than ever before,
have hastened from all parts of the world, that they might, with
the successor of St. Peter and under his guidance, consult for the
present urgent interests of the Church. After many and serious
debates the Holy Father, in virtue of his Apostolical authority as
teacher, on April 24 and July 18 of this year, with the consent of
the holy Council, solemnly published several decrees relating to
the true doctrine about faith, the Church, and its supreme
head.

1 By this means, then, the infallible teaching authority of the
Church has decreed, and the Holy Ghost by the vicar of Christ
and the Episcopate united with him has spoken : and therefore
all, whether Bishops, priests or laymen, are bound to receive their
decrees as divinely revealed truths, and with joyful hearts lay
hold of them and confess the same, if they wish to be and remain
true members of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
When, then, beloved in the Lord, objections are raised, and you
hear it maintained that the Vatican Council is no true General

APPENDIX. 227

Council, and that its decisions are of no authority, do not allow
yourselves to be led astray thereby, so as to falter in your de-
votion to the Church and in your belief and acceptance of its
decrees ; for such objections are wholly unfounded.

* Bound together in the unity of faith and love with the Pope,
have the assembled Bishops, both those who in Christian lands
administer well-established sees, and also those who are called to
extend the Kingdom of God among the heathen in apostolic
poverty, Bishops, whether they tend a larger or a smaller flock —
these, as legitimate successors of the Apostles, have all with the
same right taken part in the Council and maturely considered
everything.

' As long as the discussions lasted, the Bishops, as their con-
sciences demanded, and as became their office, expressed their
views plainly and openly, and with all necessary freedom ; and, as
was only to be expected in an assembly of nearly 800 Fathers, many
differences of opinion were manifested. These differences of
opinion can in no way affect the authority of the decrees them-
selves ; should even we not take into consideration the fact, that
almost the entire body of the Bishops who, at the time of the
Public Session, still maintained an opposite opinion, abstained in
the said Session from expressing dissent.

* However, to maintain that either the one or the other of the
doctrines decided by the General Council are not contained in the
Holy Scripture, and in tradition of the Church—those two sources
of the Catholic faith — or that they are even in opposition to the
same, is a first step, irreconcilable with the primary principles
of the Catholic Church, which leads to separation from her com-
munion. Wherefore, we hereby declare that the present Vatican
Council is a legitimate General Council ; and, moreover, -that this
Council as little as any other General Council, has propounded or
formed a new doctrine at variance with the ancient teaching ;
but that it has simply developed and thrown light upon the old
and faithfully-preserved truth contained in the deposit of faith,
and in opposition to the errors of the day has proposed it
expressly to the belief of all the faithful; and, lastly, that
these decrees have received a binding power on all the faithful
by the fact of their final publication by the Supreme Head of
the Church in solemn form at the Public Session.

'While, then, we ourselves with full and unhesitating faith
adhere to the decrees of the Council, we exhort you as your
divinely appointed pastors and teachers, and beseech you in love
to your souls, to give no ear to any teaching contrary to this,

228 THE VATICAN COUNCIL.

whencesoever it may come. Cling all the more unwaveringly,
in union so with your Bishops, to the teaching and faith of the
Catholic Church ; let nothing separate you from the Rock on
which Jesus Christ has founded His Church, with the promise
that the "gates of hell shall not prevail against it." In view of
the excitement which exists in consequence of un-ecclesiastical
manifestations and movements against the decrees of the Council in
several places, and which undoubtedly forms no small trial and
danger to many souls, as well as considering the tremendous
war which has been forced upon our German Fatherland, and
which claims at the same time our intense interest and watch-
fulness, and which has already plunged innumerable families
into sorrow and mourning, we cannot forbear from earnestly
calling all the faithful to fervent prayer for the present great
necessities of Church and State. Lift up, then, your hearts in
faith and confidence to our Father in Heaven, "Whose wise and
loving Providence guides and rules everything, and whose Divine
Son has promised most surely to hear us when we ask in His
name.

' Pray also with faith and trust that this sanguinary war, by a
complete triumph of the right cause, and a true and lasting peace,
may quickly end. Pray for the wants of Holy Church, especially
for all who err or hesitate in their faith, that they may have the
grace of a firm, decided, and living faith. Pray for the Supreme
Head of the Church, the holy Father, who most likely at this
very moment is more than ever before in distress and embarrass-
ment. Pray with confidence in the merits and infinite love of
the Divine Heart of Jesus Christ, invoking the powerful inter-
cession of the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God.

* And may the blessing of God Almighty descend upon you and
remain with yon all, in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the Holy Ghost.- — Amen.

'At the end of August, 1870.

* GEEGOEY, Archbishop of Munich.

* PAUL, Archbishop of Cologne.

* PETEE JOSEPH, Bishop of Limburg.

* CHEISTOPHEE FLOEENTIUS, Bishop of Fulda.

* WILLIAM EMMANUEL, Bishop of Mayence.

* EDWAED JAMES, Bishop of Hildesheim.

* CONRAD, Bishop of Paderborn.

* JOHN, Bishop of Kulm.

* IGNATIUS, Bishop of Ratisbon.

APPENDIX. 229

* PANCRATIUS, Bishop of Augsburg.

* FEANCIS LEOPOLD, Bishop of Eichstadt.

* MATTHIAS, Bishop of Treves.

* PHILIP, Bishop of Ermland.

* LOTHAIE, Bishop of Leuka in partibus, Administrator of

the Archbishopric of Friburg.

* ADOLPHUS, Bishop of Agathonopolis in partibus, Chaplain in

Chief of the Forces.
« BERNARD BRINKMANN, Vicar- Capitular and Bishop Elect of

Miinster.
CONRAD EEITHA, Bishop Elect of Speyer.'

LONDON : PKINTED BY

BPOTX1SWOODK AND CO., NEW-STBBBT SQUAKli
AND PABLIAMENT STKEEX

GENERAL INDEX.

NOTE.— i. refers to Pastoral Letter No. I. The Centenary of St. Peter and the General Council,

pp. 1-141.
ii. refers to Pastoral Letter No. II. The (Ecumenical Council and the Infallibility of the

Roman Pontiff', pp. 1-151.
iii. refers to Pastoral Letter No. III. The Vatican Council and its Definitions, pp. 1-229.

ABO

A BOLITION of the state religion,

JHL ii. 15

Acclamation, definition by, iii. 36. In
the Council of Chalcedon, iii. 37

Act of faith, iii. 46

Address of the Bishops to the Pope,
July 1, 1867, i. 30, 39, 120

Agatho, Pope St., iii. 84, 125

Aguirre, Cardinal, i. 52, 53

Alcuin, ii. 81

Alexander VIII., Pope, his Constitution
Inter multiplices of January 1691,
i. 45

Allegations of Protestant critics, i. 35

Allocution of the Sovereign Pontiff,
June 26.. 1867, i. 28, 109

Alphonsus Liguori, St., iii. 63

Ambrose, St., i. 14; iii. 79

Animosity of newspapers against the
Council, iii. 3

Anselm, Bishop of Havelburg, ii. 78

Anselm, St., ii. 77

Antonelli, letter of Cardinal, iii. 39

Antoninus, St., iii. 61

Apostles, the, primacy of St. Peter over,
iii. 55. Snared the plenitude of ju-
risdiction with St. Peter, 52

Apostolic authority of the Roman Pon-
tiff, iii. 57. Office of teaching, 49.
Tradition, 123

Apostolorum Limina, visitation of, i. 15

Appeal, none from the Eoman Pontiff,
iii. 55

Aquinas, St. Thomas, ii. 73

Archbishop of Cologne, iii. 5, note. Of
Munich, letter of Pope Pius IX. to,
77

Archives of the Vatican Council, iii. 32,
56, note

Aristotle, his definition of science,
iii. 132

Arius, condemnation of, iii. 73

Assembling of the Bishops in 1867, i. 9

Assent of the Episcopate, iii. 92

Assistance, the Divine, promised to

BOU

Peter, iii. 57. Of the Holy Ghost,
106, 113

Auctorem Fidei, the Bull of Pius VI.,
i. 41, 49; iii. 76, 88

Augsburg Gazette, iii. 4, 6

Augustine, St., i. 14, 16, 27; ii. 26;
iii. 58, 71, 80, 106. The true doc-
trines of grace in, 71, 72

Augustinus of Jansenius, iii. 67, 73, 89

Authority, doctrinal, of the Roman Pon-
tiff, iii. 56. Divine, of the Church, 43

Avignon, the Sovereign Pontiff at, i. 15

BACON, Lord, his description of cer-
tain philosophers, iii. 135
Balaam, gift of prophecy in, iii. 85
Ballerini, De vi et ratione Primatus,

iii. 97

Bannez, 0. P., Dominic, iii. 61
Barrow on the Pope's supremacy, iii.

136
Bellarmine, Cardinal, i. 17, 21, 23, 76,

79; ii. 58; iii. 61

Benedict XIV., constitutions of, i. 15
Bernard, St., ii. 78
Bianchi, 0. P., Raymund, De constitu-

tione Monarchica Ecclesia, iii. 101,

104, 111
Bishop Hay, iii. 151. Of Mayence, 4,

Milner, 151. Of Rottemburg, 6
Bishops, in an (Ecumenical Council,

judges, i. 78. Witnesses, iii. 139..

Not deputies, 21. Of thirty nations,

25. A minority of, 107. Assem-
bling of the, i. 9. Answer of, to the

Sovereign Pontiff, 30
Bonaventure, St., ii. 75
Boniface VIII. , ii. 72.
Bossuet, his testimony on the doctrine

of Infallibility, i. 40, 42, note
Bottalla, S. J., Father, on the Supreme

Authority of the Pope, ii. 94, note
Bouix, De Papa et de Concilio CEcu-

menico, ii. 98, 105

232

GENERAL INDEX.

BRA

Bradwardine, Archbishop of Canter-
bury, ii. 73

Bramhall's 'Schism Guarded,' iii. 136

Brancatus, i. 25, 26, 71

Brief Paternce Charitati of Innocent
XI., April 1682, i. 45

Bull Auctorem Fidei of Pius VI., i. 41,
49; iii. 76, 88. Inter cunctos of
Martin V., 76. Of indiction of the
Council, ii. 7

Butler, Eev. Alban, iii. 148

Bzovius, 0. P., Abraham, A.D. 1619,
iii. 98

pJESARISM, ii. 94

\J Caiaphas, gift of prophecy in,

iii. 85
Campian, S. J., F. Edmund, his answer

to Whitaker, iii. 144
Canus, 0. P., Melchior, iii. 63, 122
Cappellari, Mauro, ' II Trionfo della

Santa Sede,' iii. 101
Cardinal Aguirre, i. 52, 53. Anton elli,

iii. 39, 173. Bellarmine, i. 17, 21,

23, 76, 79; ii. 58; iii. 61. Gerdil,
iii. 72. Orsi, i. 26, 58, 68, 71, 74;
iii. 224. Pacca, iii. 30. Pallavicini,

24. Pole, 142. Sfondrati, 104.
Toletus, 94. Turrecremata or Tor-
quemada, 70

Cardinal Presidents of the Council,
iii. 33, 34

Caroline Books, ii. 82

Cathedra Petri, i. 24 ; iii. 58

Catholicism, a blunder, i. 39

Ce qui se passe au Concile, a libel, iii. 33

Censures, the greater and less, iii. 67,
74, 75, 89

Centenary of 1867, its moral signifi-
cance, i. 4. And the Council of
Trent, 12

Centralisation, ii. 37

Cerboni, 0. P., De Jure et Legum dis-
ciplina, iii. 110

Chapters, the three, condemnation of,
iii. 67, 73

Character of the Vatican Council, iii. 42

Charisma of the supreme jurisdiction of
the Eoman Pontiff, ii. 61 ; iii. 56, 89.
97

Charter of the Church, iii. 59

Church, authority of, iii. 43, 87, 122,
131. Body of, 51. Head of, 51.
The infallible motive of credibility,
48, 50. Charter of, 59. Divine le-
gation of, 50. A divine witness, 48,
51, 123. Magisterium of, 87, 122,

DEC

131. Office of, 50. Teacher of all
nations, 66. Teacher of truth, 47.
Tradition of, 124. Unity of faith
and communion in, 55. Two ele-
ments of the discipline of, i. 81
Civilisation of old Catholic countries,

iii. 25

Clement V., Pope, ii. 72. VI., Pope,
ii. 74; iii. 101. VII., Pope, ii. 72.
XI., Pope, iii. 71
Condemnation of error, duty of, iii. 77.

Of Grallicanism, i. 45, 47, 49
Consent of the Episcopate, i. 93
Constitution, De Fid,e Catkolica, iii. 43-
53, 182, 192. DeEcclesia, 54, 204,
211. Inter multiplices of Alexander
VIII., January 1691, i. 47
Conversion of Protestants, ii. 35
Council of Nice, the First (Ecumenical,
iii. 15, 73, Of Ephesus, the Third
(Ecumenical, 73. Of Chalcedon, the
Fourth ditto, ii. 87 ; iii. 37, 84. Of
Constantinople (second), the Fifth
ditto, 67r 73. Of Constantinople
(third), the Sixth ditto, ii. 84; iii. 38,
84. Of Nicaea (second), the Seventh
ditto, ii. 82. Of Constantinople
(fourth), the Eighth ditto, ii. 81;
iii. 56. Of Lyons (second), the
Fourteenth ditto, i. 74; ii. 75; iii. 56,
60, 87. Of Vienne, the Fifteenth
ditto, i. 75. Of Constance, ii. 40, 69,
94, 95, 99 ; iii. 75. Of Florence, the
Sixteenth ditto, i. 74 ; ii. 28, 33, 68,
94, 99 ; iii. 56. Of Lateran (fifth),
the Seventeenth ditto, ii. 69. Of
Trent, the Eighteenth ditto, i. 75, 88,
90; ii. 6, 35, 69; iii. 15, 41, 60, 68
Council of the Vatican, the Nineteenth
(Ecumenical, the reasons for con-
voking it, i. 69. And the supreme
Pontiff, 71. Not a parliament, iii. 17,
21. Cannot be written down, 28.
Character of, 42. Alleged indiffer-
ence to, 13, 17. Liberty of, 28, 29,
30, 32

Credibility, motive of. ii. 125
Creed of Pope Pius IV., i. 89
Criticism, historical, ii. 125, 126
Cyprian, St., i. 13, 27 ; iii. 58, 70
Cyril of Alexandria, St., iii. 80

DECREES EX CATHEDRA, i. 59.
Definition, two senses of the word,
iii. 87. Of faith, 39. History of,
41. Of the Roman Pontiff irreform-

GENERAL INDEX.

233

DEP

able, 55, 57. Kectifications of partial
errors, 41. Value of, 57

Deposit of faith, iii. 60, 77, 113. Cus-
tody of, 67

Doctor of the Universal Church, i. 34.

Doctrine of faith and morals, iii. 87.

Documents of the Centenary of 1867, i.
107. Of the Vatican Council of 1870,
iii. 164

Dollinger, Dr., iii. 4

Dominic, family of St., ii. 122

Duty of condemnation of error, iii. 77

Duval of the Sorbonne, i. 63

EAST, reunion with the, ii. 29, 34
Ecclesia Docens, the Episcopate,
together with Peter, i. 77; iii. 106,
113,123,139. Cannot be dissolved,
106

Ecclesia Discens, the faithful, iii. 107,
113

Encyclical of 1864, i. 37, 55

England, the old and the new, ii. 9.
The Catholic Church in, 11

Episcopate, the ecclesia docens, iii. 106.
How distinct from the Eoman Pontiff,
43. Without its head not infallible,
90

Equilibrium of mind and will, ii. 27, 124

Error, duty of condemnation of, iii. 77

Evidence of the first six G-eneral Coun-
cils, i. 73. Of revelation, iii. 97

Ex Cathedra decrees, i. 59 ; ii. 61.
Meaning of, iii. 57, 58, 89

Excommunication, iii. 19

FAITH, act of, iii. 46 ; deposit of, 60,
77. The ordinary medium of, i.
57. -Duty of, iii. 47. Illuminated,
49. Motive of, 46. Obedience of,
46. Eule of, 122. Stability in, 56.
And morals, 57, 60, 86. And reason,
49. And revelation, 41, 47. And
unbelief, 43. And science, 49

Fathers of the Church, iii. 120

Fenelon, i. 42

Ferre, Vincent, 0. P., A.D. 1 675, quoted,
iii. 99

Fisher, Cardinal, against Luther, iii.
142

Fiume, Ignatius de, Bishop of Polig-
nano, Naples, iii. 103

Five points of the charter of the Church,
iii. 59

France, the Church of to-day in, i. 53.
The Council in, ii. 17

ROM

Franzelin, S. J., i. 61
Frohschammer, i. 78
Fulda, the German Bishops at, iii. 120,
153

r\ AE T A, the Sovereign Pontiff at, i. 1 5 ;
VI Gallicanism, i. 41, 45, 47 ; ii. 53,

55; iii. 35, 140, 149
Gallicans capable of sacramental abso-
lution, i. 51
Gatti, Vincent, 0. P., Secretary of the

Congregation of the Index, iii. 100
Gerdil, Cardinal, i. 34 ; iii. 72
Gerin, M., Kecherches historiques sur

1'Assemblee du Clerg6 de France de

1682, ii. 108, etc.
Gerson, ii. 64, 70, 96, 105
Gnosticism, modern, iii. 135, 138
Godard, M. l'Abb6, Les Principes de

'89 et la Doctrine Catholique, ii. 22
Gonzalez, De Infallibiliiate Eomani

Pontificis, i. 61 ; ii. 92
Governments, representations of, iii. 19.

And the Council, ii. 127
Grace, order of, i. 83. True doctrines

of, iii. 71, 72. Of stability in faith,

56
Gravina, Dominic, 0. P., A.D. 1620,

quoted, iii. 99
Gregory de Valentia, i. 59; iii. 61, 63,

132

Gregory Nazianzen, St., iii. 70
Gregory XVI., Pope, iii. 101

HAEDING, Thomas, D.D., quotation
from, iii. 143

Hay, Bishop, iii. 151

Hefele, Bishop of Eottemburg, iii. 6

Henry VIII. of England, ii. 52

Henri cian heresy, the, ii. 81

Heresy, history of, iii. 41. Progress of,
42. And the tradition of the Church,
123. Partial aberration from truth,
41. Condemned by the Council of
Trent, 43

Hermes, i. 78

Hervaeus Natalia, 0. P., A.D. 1323,
quoted, iii. 63

History, of the Church, iii. 123. Diffi- »
culties of human, 119. Judge in
matters of, 115. ' Scientific,' 114,
116, 125, 128. Truths of, 68

Holy Ghost, assistance of the, iii. 113.
1 Illuminating the intelligence, 47

Homily of Pius IX., June 29, 1867,
i. 116

234

GENERAL INDEX.

HON
Honoriu8, Pope, ii. 85, 91, 92, 132;

iii. 117, 122, 126, 129, 223
Hormisdas, Pope, ii. 86 ; iii. 69
Hungary, plenary council of, in 1686,

i. 45
Huss and Wickliffe, iii. 75

IB AS, chapter of, iii. 73
Immaculate Conception, i. 8 ; ii. 43,
48, 50, 63, 65

Impeccability and Infallibility, iii. 85
Imperialism, ii. 53, 94
Incarnation, the living witness of the,

111. 47. Christendom resting on the,
i. 83

Indiction of the Council, ii. 7
Indifference of the world to the Council,

ii. 5, 17; iii. 13, 17, 157
Infallibility of God, ii. 30 ; iii. 46

— of the Church, three classes of evi-
dence for, i. 21. Active and Passive,
23. The supreme office of teaching
and ruling, 26. The ordinary medium
of Divine Faith, 57. In matters op-
posed to revelation, iii. 66. In
matters not revealed, 87. Extension
of the, 78. In the custody of the
Deposit of Faith, 67. In the minor
censures, 74. Limits of the, 78.
Object of, 66

— of the Roman Pontiff, i. 17, 21, 23,
26, 29. Denial of, iii. 27, 35. Effi-
cient cause of, 79. Limitation of, 58,
86. Object of, 59. Intrinsic, 91.
How personal, 94, 96, 103, 104, 112,
150. How independent, 97, 107,

112. How absolute, 97, 113. How
separate, 98, 100, 105, 107, 113.
Vide under MAGISTERIUM

Innocent II., Pope, ii. 78. X., Pope,

102. XII., i. 48

Inspiration and infallibility, iii. 85
Intellect and will, iii. 47
Interest in regard to the Council, iii. 10
Ireland, i. 83
Irreformable, meaning of, iii. 40. 57,

TANSENISTS, ii. 8, 57, 65 ; iii. 69, 73
i) Jansenius, condemnation of the
' Augustinus' of, i. 78 ; ii. 102, 105,
143 ; iii. 67

Janus, ' The Pope and the Council,' by,
ii. 93 ; iii. 4. On the freedom of the
Council, 1 1. Distributed by Govern-
ments, 136. Discovery of plot by,

MAT

37. How regarded, 114. Essen-
tially heretical, 128, 135

Jerome, St., i. 27 ; ii. 72, 85 ; iii. 141

Jewell, Anglican Protestantism of, iii.
127, 136

Judge, supreme, over all the Church,
iii. 55

Judgments, dogmatic, iii. 88

Jurisdiction, primacy of, in Peter and
his successors, iii. 55, 56

Justin Martyr, St., iii. 116

TTAUNITZ, spirit of, i. 101

A. Kellison, Matthew, D.D., ' Survey
of the New Religion,' by, iii. 145

Ketteler, Bishop Von, of Mayence, iii. 4

Keys of jurisdiction and knowledge,
i. 24 ; ii. 94

Knowledge, two orders of, iii. 48. In-
strument of, 49. Key of, i. 24 ; ii.
94

' T A derniere Heure du Concile,' iii. 33
Jj Lamennais, i. 78
Latrocinium of Ephesus, iii. 40
Launoy condemned, iii. 71
Leo, St., the Great, i. 14, 20, 29, 67,

114; ii. 81, 83, 88, 157; iii. 81,83
Libels on the Council, iii. 33
Liberius, Pope, iii. 1 1 8
Liberty of the Council, 28, 30, 32
Limina Apostolorum, visitation of, i. 15
Literature of the day, iii. 46
Loqui ex cathedra, iii. 57
Louis XIV. of France, ii. 52
Lupoli. i. 19
Luther, ii. 99; iii. 115, 141, 142

MACEDO, 0. S. F., Tessera Romana,
i. 64

Magdeburg Centuriators, iii. 137
Magisterium, or teaching authority, of

the Church, ii. 61, 73; iii. 87, 122,

131. Of the Roman Pontiff, 87, 89,

113
Majority, the, in the Council, iii. 12, 18,

28, 30

Marca, Peter de, i. 53
Marchese, Dominic, 0. P., A.D. 1680,

Bishop of Pozzuoli, iii. 98, 100
Maret, Mgr., Bishop of Sura, Du Concile

General, ii. 139
Martin V., Pope, his Bull Inter cunctos,

iii. 76
Materialism, iii. 50

GENERAL INDEX.

235

MAT

Matrimony, sacrament of, ii. 129
Mayence, Bishop of, iii. 4
Minority in the Council, iii. 12, 18, 28,

Misunderstandings, popular, i. 77
Monarchy of the Eoman Pontiff, ii. 147,

148

Monitumof the Eoman Pontiff, iii. 51
Morals, faith and, iii. 57, 60, 86
More, Sir Thomas, against Luther,

iii. 141

Moses, the chair of, iii. 58
Motive of faith, iii. 46
Munich, Theological Faculty of, ii. 131
Murray, Dr., of Maynooth, iii. 75
Muzzarelli, quoted, i. 72 ; iii. 101

NATIONALISM, i. 41; ii. 98, 116
note

Nations, thirty, represented at the Vati-
can Council, iii. 25

Naturalism, iii. 44

Nestorius, condemnation of, iii. 73

Newspapers at the time of the Centen-
ary, i. 10. Animosity of, to the
Council, iii. 3

Nicolas I., Pope, iii. 69

Nine phases of attack against the defi-
nition, iii. 38

Nonconformists, i. 97

OBEDIENCE, civil, i. 97. Of faith,
iii. 46
Object of the Infallibility of the Church,

iii. 66. Of the Eoman Pontiff, 59
Ockam, ii. 64; iii. 132
(Ecumenicity of the Council, ii. 7
Opinion, public, hostile to the Catholic

religion, iii. 25, 30 note
Optatus, St., i. 14. His use of the

phrase Cathedra Petri, iii. 58
Order of faith, iii. 49. Of nature, 45,

49. Of truth, i. 67 ; iii. 45. The

supernatural in, ii. 10
Oriental Bishops, ii. 8
Orsi, Cardinal, i. 26, 58, 68, 71, 74
Osma, Peter de, ii. 66, 91, 99

PACCA, Cardinal, iii. 30 note
Pallavicini, Cardinal, iii. 24
Paolo Sarpi, iii. 3
Patriarchs, i. 94
Paul, St., at Corinth, ii. 11
Peccatum Philosophicum, ii. 144
Pelagianism, ii. 63 ; iii. 71, 72

REV

Pelagius II., Pope, iii. 81

Philipps, Du Droit Ecclesiastique, i. 54

Pistoia, Synod of, iii. 88

Pius IV., Pope, creed of, i. 89. VI.,
his Bull Auctorem Fidei, i. 41, 49 ;
iii. 76, 88. VII., imprisonment of,
30. IX., calumnies against, 10, 34,
156. Monitum of, 51. His letter to
the Archbishop of Munich, 77

Plowden, Eev. Charles, iii. 149

Poland, i. 83

Pole, Cardinal, iii. 142

Pombal, i. 101

Pontiff, the Eoman, how distinct from
the Episcopate, iii. 113. Magiste-
rium of, ii. 73 ; iii. 87, 89, 113. Ir-
reformable definitions of, 55, 57.
Supreme Jurisdiction, 55

Praxis of the Church, ii. 64

Prerogatives of St. Peter, i. 17

Primacy, a privilege attaching to the
person of Peter and his successors,
iii. 103. Charisma of the, 141. Of
jurisdiction, 55. Three consequences
of, 55,56,

Principles of 1789, ii. 17, 19, 23

Privilege, meaning of, iii. 103

Privilegium Petri, ii. 141

Prosper, St., i. 20

Protestantism, Anglican, iii. 127. Lu-
theran, 127

Protestants, conversion of, ii. 35

Public opinion hostile to the Catholic
religion, iii. 25

QUANTA CUBA, the Encyclical, i.

Quedlinburg, Synod of, ii. 80
Quirinus, letters on the Council by, iii.
4, 119

RATIONALISM, ii. 124 ; iii. 43, 44
JX Eaynaud, Theophilus, i. 66 ; ii. 71,
142

Eeason and faith, iii. 49

Eeformation, heresies of the, i. 89 ; ii.
6, 100; iii. 43

Eegalism, ii. 53

Eeunion with the East, ii, 29, 34

Eevelation, the communication of super-
natural truth, iii. 45. The Church
the divine witness, teacher, and judge
of, 123. Two orders of truth in, 45.
And faith, 41. Of the supernatural
order, 43. Man bound to believe, 46

Ee volution, ii. 129

236

GENERAL INDEX.

ROC

Koccaberti, Bibliotheca Maxima Ponti-
ficia, i. 25 ; iii. 63, 70, 98, 111, 142

Roskovany, Bishop of Neitra, De Ro-
mano Pontifice, i. 46, 48; ii. 66, 100,
102

Eule of faith, iii. 121

O ACRAMENTUM GRAECORUM, ii.

O 76

Saint Alphonsus Liguori, iii. 63. Am-
brose, i. 14 ; iii. 79. Anselm, ii. 77.
Antoninus, iii. 61. Augustine, i. 14,
16, 27; ii. 26, 104; iii. 58, 71, 80,
106. Cyprian, i. 13, 22; iii. 58, 70.
Cyril of Alexandria, iii. 80. Gelasius,
iii. 71, 81. Gregory the Great, iii.
82. Gregory Nazianzen, iii. 70.
Irenaeus,i. 19, 27; ii. 91 ; iii. 214. Je-
rome, i. 27; ii. 72, 85; iii. 141. John
Chrysostom, iii. 80, 123. Leo the
Great, i. 20, 29, 71, 78 ; ii. 87; iii.
81, 83, 211, 213. Thomas Aquinas,
ii. 73 ; iii. 88, 132. Thomas of Can-
terbury, ii. 14, 52, 77. Vitalian, iii. 83

Salutation of the Bishops, i. 30, 39, 120

Sanders, Nicolas, D.D , iii. 145

Sarpi, Paolo, iii. 3

Scavini, i. 51

Schrader, F. Clement, S. J., De Unitate
Romana, i. 26, 28; ii. 142

Science, definition of, iii. 131, 132. And
faith, 49. And historical certainty,
ii. 126

Secret, the Pontifical, ii. 26

Semipelagianism, iii. 71, 72

Sessions of the Council, iii. 24

Sfondrati, Cardinal, O.S.B., A.D. 1680,
i. 48, 59 ; iii. 104

Six points of the definition of the In-
fallibility of the Roman Pontiff, iii.
57

Soto, Peter, O.P., A.D. 1557, quoted, iii.
101

Southwell, author of Eegula viva .sen
Analysis Fidei, iii. 147

Stapleton, Thomas, D.D., i. 19 ; iii. 71

States, the United, i. 102 ; iii. 32

Suarez, i. 61, 63; iii. 62

Supernatural order, the, iii. 42. Present
in the world, 50

Sylvius, i. 62

Synod of Pistoia, iii. 88. Of Quedlin-
burg, ii. 80

ZOS

TEMPORAL POWER, downfall of
JL the, i. 38; ii. 128; iii. 156
Tertullian, i. 27 ; iii. 119
Teutonic element, i. 35, 37
Theodoret, i. 27
Theology how a science, ii. 126 ; iii.

133. Technical language of, iii. 103
Theses Damnatae, ii. 51, 143; iii. 75
Thirty nations, Bishops of, i. 10; iii. 25
Thomas Aquinas, St., ii. 73 ; iii. 88, 132
Thorndike, 'Epilogue' of, iii. 136
Tradition, Apostolic, iii. 109, 123. Of

the faith, 139
Truth, two orders of, iii. 45. The

guardian of, 47. Of human history, 63
Tudors, legislation of the, ii. 14
Turrecremata or Torquemada, Cardinal,

i. 71 ; iii. 70

1 TTBIPETRUSIBIECCLESIA; ii.

V 49

Ultramontanism, i. 35, 39 ; ii. 45, 67,

80, 111, 117; iii. 13, 35
Unanimity of the Council, iii. 1 8, 26
Universal Doctor, office of, iii. 109
Universality of the mission of the

Church, iii. 59

United States, the, i. 102; iii. 32
Unity, strivings for, ii. 9, 16

T7ASQUEZ, iii. 132
V Veracitv of

Veracity of God, iii. 46
Vicars, Apostolic, iii. 139
Vigilius, Pope, iii. 118 note. Vigilius

Dormitans of Crakenthorp, 1 36
Visitation of the Limina Apostolorum, i.

Vitalian, Pope St., iii. 83
Vulgate, the, iii. 68

TTTICKLIFFE, iii. 75
VV Will and intellect, iii. 47. And

reason, 59

Witness of the Church, ii. 125
World, indifference of, to the Council,

iii. 13, 17. Interest of, in the Council,

10. Materialism of, 50

f/ACCARIA, Antifebronius, i. 42, 45 ;
JL ii. 104

Zosimus, Pope St., letter of, ii. 85, 103

Spotlisu-oode & Co., Printers, New-street Square, London.

39 PATERNOSTER Row, E.G.
LONDON, March 1876.

GENERAL LIST OF WORKS

PUBLISHED BY

MESSRS. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND Co.

PAGE

ARTS, MANUFACTURES, &c. . . . 26

ASTRONOMY & METEOROLOGY . . 17

BIOGRAPHICAL WORKS 7

CHEMISTRY & PHYSIOLOGY ... 24
DICTIONARIES & other BOOKS of

REFERENCE 15

FINE ARTS & ILLUSTRATED EDI-
TIONS 25

HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL

MEMOIRS, &c i

INDEX 41 to 44

PAGE

MENTAL & POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 8

MISCELLANEOUS & CRITICAL WORKS 12
NATURAL HISTORY & PHYSICAL

SCIENCE 19

POETRY & the DRAMA 36

RELIGIOUS & MORAL WORKS . . 29
RURAL SPORTS, HORSE & CATTLE

MANAGEMENT, &c 37

TRAVELS, VOYAGES-, &c 32

WORKS of FICTION 35

WORKS of UTILITY & GENERAL

INFORMATION 39

HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL
MEMOIRS, &e.

The History of England
from the Accession of
James II.

By the Right Hon. Lord
Macaulay.

STUDENT'S EDITION, 2 vols. cr. %vo. 12s.
PEOPLE'S EDITION, 4 vols. cr. Svo. i6s.
CABINET EDITION, 8 vols. post 8vo. 48*.
LIBRARY EDITION, 5 vols. %vo. ^4.

Critical and Historical

Essays contributed to the
Edinburgh Review.

By the Right Hon. Lord
Macaulay.

CHEAP EDITION, crown 8vo. y. 6d.
STUDENT'S EDITION, crown 8vo. 6.r.
PEOPLE'S EDITION, 2 vols. crown 8tv. 8s.
CABINET EDITION, 4 vols. 2$s.
LIBRARY EDITION, 3 vols. 8w. 36^.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Lord Macaulay s Works.

Complete and uniform Li-
brary Edition.
Edited by his Sister, Lady
Trevelyan.

8 vols. 8vo. 'with Portrait, £$. $s.

The History of England
from the Fall of Wolsey to
the Defeat of the Spanish
Armada.
By J. A. Froude, M.A.

CABINET EDITION, 12 vols. cr&vo. ^3. i2s.
LIBRARY EDITION, 12 vols. 8w. ^8. iSs.

The English in Ireland
in the Eighteenth Century.
By J. A. Froude, M.A.

3 vols. 8vo. £2. 8s.

Journal of the Reigns of
King George the Fourth
and King William the
Fourth.

By the late Charles Caven-
dish Fidke Greville, Esq.
Edited by H. Reeve, Esq.

Fifth Edition. 3 vols. 8ve. price %6s.

The Life of Napoleon III.

derived from State Records ',
Unpublished Family Cor-
respondence, and Personal
Testimony.
By Blanchard Jerrold.

In Four Volumes 8vo. with numerous
Portraits and Facsimiles. VOLS. I.
and II. price iSs. each.
*#* The Third Volume is now in the press.

Recollections and Sugges-
tions, 1813-1873.
ByJohnEarlRussell.K. G.

New Edition, revised and enlarged. &vo. l6s.

Introductory Lectures on

Modern History delivered
in Lent Term 1842 ; with
the Inaugural Lectitre de-
livered in December 1841.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

&vo. price Js. 6d.

On Parliamentary Go-
vernment in England: its
Origin, Development, and
Practical Operation.
By AlpheiLs Todd.

2 vols. 8vo. £i. lyj.

The Constitutional His-
tory of England since the
Accession of George III.
1760-1870.

By Sir Thomas Erskine
May, K.C.B. D.C.L.

Fifth Edition. 3 vols. crown %vo. l8j.

Democracy in Rurope ;
a History.

By Sir Thomas Erskine
May, K.C.B. D.C.L.

2 vols. Sw0. [In the press.

Lectures on the History
of England from the Ear-
liest Times to the Death of
King Edward II.
By W. Longman, F.S.A.

Maps and Illustrations. 8vo. l$s.

The History of the Life
and Times of Edward III.
By W. Longman, F.S.A.

With 9 Maps, 8 Plates, and 1 6 Woodcuts,
2 vols. 8vo. 2&s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

History of England
imder the Duke of Bucking-
ham and Charles the First,
1624-1628.

By S. Rawson Gardiner,
late Student of Ch. Ch.

2 vols. 8vo. "with two Maps, 24^.

Popular History of

France, from the Earliest

Times to the Death of

Louis XIV.

By Elizabeth M. Sewell,
A^lthor of 'Amy Her-
bert' &c.

Crown Svo. [Nearly ready.

The History of Prussia,
from the Earliest Times to
the Present Day ; tracing
the Origin and Develop-
ment of her Military Or-
ganisation.
By Captain W. J. Wyatt.

Voh. I. & II. A.D. 700 to A.D. 1525.

8w. 36-$-.

History of Civilisation in
England and France, Spain
and Scotland.
By Henry Thomas Buckle.

3 vols.

24J-.

A Student's Manual of
the History of India from
the Earliest Period to the
Present.

By Col. Meadows Taylor,
M.R.A.S.

Second Thousand. Cr. 8v0. Maps, *]s. 6d.

Studies from Genoese

History.

By Colonel G. B. Malleson,
C.S.I. Guardian to His
Highness the Mahardjd
of Mysore.

Crown 8w. los. 6d.

The Native States of
India in Subsidiary Al-
liance with the British
Government; an Historical
Sketch.

By Colonel G. B. Malleson,
C.S.I. Guardian to the
Mahardjd of Mysore.

With 6 Coloured MapS) %vo. price l$s.

The History of India

from the Earliest Period
to the close of Lord Dal-
housies Administration.
By John Clark Marshman.

3 vols. crown %>vo. 22s. 6d.

Indian Polity ; a View of
the System of Administra-
tion in India.
By Lieut. -Colonel George
Chesney.

Second Edition, revised, with Map. %vo. 2 Is.

Waterloo Lectures ; a
Study of the Campaign of
1815.

By Colonel Charles C.
Chesney, R.E.

Third Edition. 2>vo. with Map, IDS. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Essays in Modern Mili-
tary Biography.
By Colonel Charles C.
Chesney, R.E.

The British Army in
1875 ; with Suggestions on
its Administration and
Organisation.
By John Holms, M.P.

New and Enlarged Edition. Crown %vo.
with Diagrams, 4^. 6d.

The Oxford Reformers —
John Colet, Erasmus, and
Thomas More; being a
History of their Fellow-
Work.
By Frederic Seebohm.

Second Edition. %vo. \^s.

The New Reformation,
a Narrative of the Old
Catholic Movement, from
1870 to the Present Time ;
with an Historical Intro-
duction.
By Theodorus.

8vo. price 12s.

The Mythology of the
Aryan Nations.
By Geo. W. Cox, M.A. late

Scholar of Trinity Col-

lege, Oxford.

2 Vols. &V0. 2&S.

A History of Greece.
By the Rev. Geo. W. Cox,
M.A. late Scholar of
Trinity College, Oxford.

Vols. I. and II. Svo. Maps, 36$-.

The History of the Pelo-
ponnesian War, by Thu-
cydides.

Translated by Richd. Craw-
ley, Fellow of Worcester
College, Oxford.

Svo. i cxr. 6d.

The Tale of the Great
Persian War, from the
Histories of Herodotus.
By Rev. G. W. Cox, M.A.

Fcp. %vo. $s. 6d.

General History of

Greece to the Death of
Alexander the Great ; with
a Sketch of the Subsequent
History to the Present
Time.

By the Rev. George W. Cox,
M.A. Author of ' The
Aryan Mythology' &c.

Crown Svo. with Maps, *js. 6d.

General History of Rome

from the Foundation of the

City to the Fall of Au-

gystuluS) B.C. 75 3 — A. D.

476.

By the Very Rev. C. Meri-
vale, D.D. Dean of Ely.

With 5 Maps, crown Svo. Js. 6d.

History of the Romans
imder the Empire.
By Dean Merivale, D.D.

8 vols. post Svo. 48.".

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Fall of the Roman
Repiiblic ; a Short History
of the Last Centiiry of the
Commonwealth.
By Dean Merivale, D.D.

Js. 6d.

The Sixth Oriental Mo-
narchy ; or the Geography,
History, and Antiquities

of Parthia. Collected and
Illustrated from Ancient
and Modern sources.
By Geo. Rawlinson, M.A.

With Maps and Illustrations. %vo. l6s.

The Seventh Great Ori-
ental Monarchy; or, a
History of the Sassanians :
with Notices Geographical
and Antiquarian.
By Geo. Rawlinson, M.A.

With Map and 95 Illustrations. %vo. 28^.

Encyclopedia of Chro-
nology, Historical and
Biographical ; comprising
the Dates of all the Great
Events of History \ inchcd-
ing Treaties, Alliances,
Wars, Battles, &c. Inci-
dents in the Lives of Emi-
nent Men, Scientific and
Geographical Discoveries,
Mechanical Inventions, and
Social, Domestic, and Eco-
nomical Improvements.
By B. B. Woodward, B,A.
and W. L. R. Gates.

The History of Rome.
By Wilhelm Ihne.

Vols. I. and II. %uo. 30^. Vols. III. ana
IV. in preparation.

History of Ruropean
Morals from Augustus to
Charlemagne.
By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

2 vols, %vo. 28^.

History of the Rise and
Influence of the Spirit of
Rationalism in Eiirope.
By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

Cabinet Edition, 2 vols. crown %vo. l6s.

Introduction to the
Science of Religion : Four
Lectiires delivered at the
Royal Institution ; with
two Essays on False Ana-
logies and the Philosophy
of Mythology.
By F. Max Muller, M.A.

Crown 8v0. IGJ. 6<£

The Stoics, Epicureans,
and Sceptics.

Translated from the Ger
man of Dr. E. Zellery
by Oswald J. Reichel,
M.A.

Crown 8v0. 145-.

Socrates and the Socratic
Schools.

Translated from the Ger-
man of Dr. E. Zeller,
by the Rev. O. J. Reichel,
M.A.

Crown Sv0. Ss. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Plato and the Older
Academy.

Translated, with the Au-
thor s sanction, from the
German of Dr. E. Zeller
by S. Frances Alleyne
and Alfred Goodwin,
B.A. Fellow of Balliol
College, Oxford.

Post %vo. \Nearly ready.

Sketch of the History of
the Church of England to
the Revolution of 1688.
By T. V. Short, D.D. some-
time Bishop of St. A saph.

New Edition. Crown Sv0. JS. 6d.

The Historical Geogra-
phy of Europe.
ByE.A. Freeman, D.C.L,

8vo. Maps. \In the press.

The Student's Manual
of Ancient History : con-
taining the Political His-
tory, Geographical Posi-
tion, and Social State of
the Principal Nations of
Antiquity.
By W.CookeTaylor.LL.D.

Crown Svo. *js. 6d.

The Student's Manual of
Modern History : contain-
ing the Rise and Progress
of the Principal European
Nations, their Political
History, and the Changes
in their Social Condition.
By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D.

Crown *&vo. "}s. 6d.

The History of Philoso-
phy, from T hales to Comte.
By George Henry Lewes.

Fourth Edition, 2 vols. $vo. $2s.

The Crusades.
By the Rev. G. W. Cox,
M.A.

Fcp. Svo. with Map, 2s. 6d.

The Era of the Pro-
testant Revolution.
By F. Seebohm, Author of
' The Oxford Reformers'

With 4 Maps and 1 2 Diagrams. Fcp. %vo.
2s. 6d.

The Thirty Years War,
1618-1648.

By Samuel Rawson Gar-
diner.

Fcp. 8vo. -with Maps, 2s. 6d.

The Houses of Lancaster
and York ; with the Con-
quest and Loss of France.
By James Gairdner.

Fcp. %vo. with Map, 2s. 6d.

Edward the Third.
By the Rev. W. War burton,
M.A.

Fcp. &v0t with Maps, 2s. 6d.

The Age of Elizabeth.
By the Rev. M. Creighton,
M.A., late Fellow and
Tutor of Merton Col-
lege, Oxford.

Fcp. %vo. -with Maps, 2s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

BIOGRAPHICAL WORKS.

The Life and Letters of
Lord Macaulay.
By his Nephew, G. Otto
Trevelyan, M.P.

2 vols. %vo. with Portrait, price $6s.

The Life of Sir William
Fair bairn, Bart. F.R.S.
Corresponding Member of
the National Institute of
France, &c.

Partly written by himself ;
edited and completed by
William Pole, F.R.S.
Member of Council of
the Institution of Civil
Engineers.

\In the press.

Arthur Schopenhauer,
his L ife and his Philosophy.
By Helen Zimmern.

Post Svo. with Portrait, Js. 6d.

The Life, Works, and
Opinions ofHeinrichHeine.
By William Stigand.

2 vols. Svo. tuith Portrait of Heine, price i&s.

Memoirs of Baron Stock-
mar.

By his Son, Baron E. Von

Stockmar. Translated

from the German by

G. A. M. Edited by

F. Max Milller, M.A.

2 vols. crown %vo. 2 is.

Admiral Sir Edward
Codrington, a Memoir of
his Life; with Selections
from his Correspondence.
Abridged from the larger
work, and edited by his
D aiight er, Lady Bour-
chier.

With Portrait, Maps, &c. Crown Svo.
. price "js. 6J.

Life and Letters of Gil-
bert Elliot, First Earl of
Minto,from 1751 to 1806,
when his Public Life in
Europe was closed by his
Appointment to the Vice-
Royalty of India.
Edited by the Countess of
Minto.

3 vols. post Svo. 3U. 6d.

Autobiography.

By John Stuart Mill.

Svo. 7.$-. 6d.

Isaac Casaubon, 1559-
1614.

By Mark Pattison, Rector
of Lincoln College, Oxford.

Svo. price i8j.

Biographical and Criti-
cal Essays, reprinted from
Reviews, with Additions
and Corrections.
By A. Hay ward, Q.C.

Second Series, 2 vols. ?>vo. 28^. Thirc,
Series , I vol. Svo. 145-.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Memoirs of Sir
John Reresby, of Tkry-
bergh, Bart. M.P. for
York, &c. 1634-1689.
Written by Himself. Edit-
ed from the Original
Manuscript by James
J. Cartwright, M.A.

%vo. price 2 is,

Lord George Bentinck ;
a Political Biography.
By the Right Hon. B.
Disraeli, M.P.

New Edition. Crown $>vo. 6s.

Essays in Ecclesiastical
Biography.

By the Right Hon. Sir J.
Stephen, LL.D.

Cabinet Edition. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d.

Leaders of Public Opi-
nion in Ireland; Swift,
Flood, Grattan, O'Connell.
By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A.

Crown 8vo. *]s. 6d.

Dictionary of General
Biography ; containing
Concise Memoirs and No-
tices of the most Eminent
Persons of all Ages and
Countries.
By W. L. R. Gates.

Neiu Edition, 8z>o. 2$s. Supplement,^. 6d.

Life of the Duke of
Wellington.

By the Rev. G. R. Gleig,
M.A.

Crown 8vo. with Portrait, $s.

The Rise of Great Fami-
lies; other Essays and
Stories.

By Sir Bernard Burke,
C.B. LL.D.

Crown 8vo. I2s. 6d.

Memoirs of Sir Henry
Havelock, K.C.B.
By John Clark Marshman.

Crown %vo. $s. 6d.

Vicissitudes of Families.
By Sir Bernard Burke,
C.B.

2 vols. crown %vo. 2 is.

MENTAL and POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

Comte's System of Posi-
tive Polity, or Treatise upon
Sociology.

Translated from the Paris
Edition of 1851-1854,
and furnished with Ana-
lytical Tables of Contents.
In Four Volumes, each
forming in some degree an
independent Treatise : —

Vol. /. General Vieiv of Positivism and
Introductory Principles. Translated by

J. H. Bridges, M. B. formerly Fellow of Oriet
College, Oxford. %vo. price 21 s.

Vol. II. TJie Social Statics, or the Ab-
stract Laws of Human Order. Translated
by Frederic Harrison, M.A. 8vo. price 14^.

Vol. III. The Social Dynamics, or the
General Laws of Human Progress (the Phi-
losophy of History}. Translated by E. S.
Beesly, M. A. Professor of History in Uni-
versity College, London. Svv.

[Nearly ready.

Vol. IV. The Synthesis of the Future of
Mankind. Translated by Richard Congreve,
M.D., and an Appendix, containing the
Author's Minor Treatises, translated by
H. D. Hutton, M.A. Barrister-at-Law.
8v0. [In the press.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Order and Progress :
Part I. Thoughts on Go-
vernment; Part II. Stu-
dies of Political Crises.
By Frederic Harrison,
M.A. of Lincoln s Inn.

Svo. I4J-.

' We find from this book — a large part, and by far
the more valuable part, of which is new — that Mr.
HARRISON has devoted careful attention to what
we shall call the constructive problems of political
science. Whoever has mistaken him for a common-
place Radical, either of the Chartist or the Trades
Unionist type, has been wrong.... The best poli-
tical thinkers for a quarter of a century or upwards
have more or less vaguely felt that one grand pro-
blem they had to solve was how our governing
apparatus may be made to yield good government ;
but we are not aware that any writer has looked it
more fully in the face, or more carefully scanned it
with a view to a solution, than Mr. HARRISON.'
LITERARY WORLD.

Essays, Political, Social,
and Religious.
By Richd. Congreve, M.A.

Svo. i&r.

Essays, Critical and

Biographical, contributed
, to the Edinburgh Review.
By Henry Rogers.

New Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. I2s.

Essays on some Theolo-
gical Controversies of the
Time, contributed chiefly
to the Edinburgh Review.
By Henry Rogers.

New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Democracy in America.
By Alexis de Tocqueville.
Translated by Henry
Reeve, Esq.

New Edition. 2 vols. crown 8vo. i6s.
A 2

On Representative Go-
vernment.
By John Stuart Mill.

Fourth Edition, crown 8v0. 2s.

On Liberty.

By John Stuart Mill.

Post 8vo. 7-r. 6d. crown &vo. is. $d.

Principles of Political

Economy.

By John Stitart Mill.

2 vols. 8vo. 3O.r. or I vol. crown Svo. $s.

Essays on someUnsettled
Questions of Political Eco-
nomy.
By John Stuart Mill.

Second Edition. 8vo. 6s. 6d.

Utilitarianism.
By John Stuart Mill.

Fourth Edition. 8vo. $s.

A System of Logic,
Ratiocinative and Induc-
tive.
By John Stuart Mill.

Eighth Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. 2$s.

Examination of Sir
William Hamilton s Phi-
losophy, and of the princi-
pal Philosophical Questions
discussed in his Writings.
By John Stuart Mill.

Fourth Edition. %vo. i6s.

Dissertations and Dis-
cussions.
By John Stuart Mill.

4 vols. %vo. price £2. 6s. Qd.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Analysis of the Pheno-
mena of the Human Mind.
By James Mill. New
Edition, with Notes,
Illustrative and Critical.

2 vols. %vo. 2%s.

The Law of Nations con-
sidered as Independent Po-
litical Commimities ; the
Rights and Duties of
Nations in Time of War.
By Sir Travers Twiss,
D.C.L. F.R.S.

New Edition, revised ; with an Introductory
Juridical Review of the Results of
Recent Wars, and an Appendix of
Treaties and other Documents. %vo.
price 21 s.

Church and State; their
relations Historically De-
veloped.

By T. Heinrich Geffcken,
Professor of Interna-
tional Law at the Uni-
versity of Strasburg.
Translated from the
German by E. Fairfax

Taylor. [In the press.

A Systematic View of
the Science of Jurispru-
dence.
By Sheldon Amos, M.A.

Svo. iSs.

A Primer of the English
Constitution and Govern-
ment.
By Sheldon Amos, M.A.

Second Edition. Crown Svo. 6s,

Outlines of Civil Pro-
cedure. Being a General
View of the Supreme Court
of Judicatiire and of the
whole Practice in the Com-
mon Law and Chancery
Divisions under all the
Statutes now in force.
With Introductory Essay,
References, Time Table,
and Index. Designed as a
Systematic and Readable
Manual for Students, and
as a Handbook of General
. Practice.

By Edward Stan ley Roscoe,
B arris ter-at- Law.

I2mo. price %s. 6d.

Principles of Economical

Philosophy.

By H. D. Macleod, M.A.
Barrister-at-L aw.

Second Edition, in 2 vols. Vol. I. Svo. l$s.
Vol. II. Part I. price I2s.

The Institutes of Jus-
tinian; with English In-
troduction, Translation,
and Notes.
By T. C. Sandars, M.A.

Fifth Edition. Svo. l$s.

Lord Bacon's Works,
Collected and Edited by R.
L. Ellis, M.A. J. Sped-
ding, M.A. and D. D.
Heath.

New and Cheaper Edition. 7 vols. %vo.
£3. IS'- &/.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Letters and Life of
Francis Bacon, including
all his Occasional Works.
Collected and edited, with

a Commentary, by J.

Spedding.

7 vols. Svo. £4. 4J-.

The Nicomachean Ethics
of A ristotle. Newly trans-
lated into English.
By R. Williams, B.A.

The Politics of Aristotle;
Greek Text, with English
Notes.
By Richard Congreve, M.A .

New Edition, revised. 8vo. iSs.

The Ethics of Aristotle;
with Essays and Notes.
By Sir A. Grant, Bart.
M.A. LL.D.

Third Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. price 32 s.

Bacon's Essays, with
Annotations.
By R. Whately, D.D.

New Edition.

. icxr. 6d.

Picture Logic ; an At-
tempt to Popularise the
Science of Reasoning by the
combination of Humorous
Pictures with Examples of
Reasoning taken from Daily
Life.
By A. Swinbourne, B.A.

Second Edition ; with Woodcut Illustrations
from Drawings by the Author. Fcp.
Svo. price $s.

Elements of Logic.
By R. Whately, D.D.

New Edition. 8v0. icxr. 6d. cr. 8v0. 4?. 6d.

Elements of Rhetoric.
By R. Whately, D.D.

New Edition.

. IQS. 6d. cr.

?. 6d.

An Outline of the Neces-
sary Laws of Thought : a
Treatise on Pure and
Applied Logic.

By the Most Rev. W.
Thomson, D.D. Arch-
bishop of York.

Twelfth Thousand. Crown %vo. 6s.

An Introduction to Men-
tal Philosophy, on the In-
ductive Method.

By J. D. Morell, LL.D.

%VO. I2S.

Philosophy without As-
sumptions.

By the Rev. T. P. Kirk-
man, F.R.S. Rector of
Croft, near Warrington.

8vo. price los. 6d.

Ueberwegs System of
Logic, and History of
Logical Doctrines.

Translated, with Notes and
Appendices, by T. M.
Lindsay, M.A. F.R.S. E.

Bva. i6s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Senses and the
Intellect.
By A. Bain, LL.D.

Third Edition, &vo. 15^.

The Emotions and the
Will.

By Alexander Bain, LL.D.
Professor of Logic in the
University of A berdeen.

Third Edition, thoroughly revised, and in
great part re-wtitten. %vo. price 15^.

Mental and Moral
Science ; a Compendiiim of
Psychology and Ethics.
By A. Bain, LL.D.

Third Edition. Crown Svo. lew. 6d. Or
separately: Part I. Mental Science, 6s. 6d.
Part II. Moral Science, 4^. 6d.

On the Influence of

Authority in Matters of
Opinion.

By the late Sir George
Cor new all Lewis, Bart.

Nciu Edition , 8vo. 14^.

Humes Treatise on Hu-
man Nature.

Edited, with Notes, &c. by
T. H. Green, M.A. and
the Rev. T. H. Grose,
M.A.

2 V0h. &V0. 2&S.

Hume's Essays Moral,
Political, and Literary.
By the same Editors.

2 Vols. %VO. 2Ss.

*#* The above form a complete and uniform
Edition of HUME'S Philosophical
Works.

MISCELLANEOUS &

Miscellaneous and Post-
humous Works of the late
Henry Thomas Buckle.
Edited,with a Biographical
Notice, by Helen Taylor.

3 vols. %vo. £2. i2s. 6d.

Short Studies on Great
Subjects.
By J. A. Froude, M.A.

CABINET EDITION, 2 vols. crown %vo. i2s.
LIBRARY EDITION, 2 vols. demy %vo. 24^.

Manual of English Lite-
rature, Historical and
Critical.
By Thomas Arnold, M.A.

New Edition. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d.

CRITICAL WORKS.

Lord Macaulays Mis-
cellaneous Writings.

LIBRARY EDITION, 2 vols. %vo. Portrait, 2is.
PEOPLE'S EDITION, i vol. cr. 8vo. ^s. 6J*

Lord Macaulay's Mis-
cellaneous Writings and
Speeches.

Students' Edition. Crown Svo. 6s.

Speeches of the Right
Hon. Lord Macau lay, cor-
rected by Himself.

People's Edition. Crown 8v0. 3^. 6d.

The Rev. Sydney Smiths
Essays contributed to the
Edinburgh Review.

Authorised Edition, complete in One Volume.
Crown &VP. 2s. 6d. sewed, or 3-r. 6d. doth.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The IVit and Wisdom of
the Rev. Sydney Smith.

Crown SZA?. 3^. 6t/.

German Home Life; a
Series of Essays on the
Domestic Life of Germany.

Reprinted, with Revision and Additions,
from ERASER'S MAGAZINE, i vol.
crown %vo. [Nearly ready.

The Miscellaneous
Works of Thomas Arnold,
D.D. Late Head Master of
Rugby School and Regius
Professor of Modern His-
tory in the Univ. of Ox-
ford.

Svo. 7-r. 6d.

Realities of Irish Life.
By W. Steuart Trench.

Cr. %vo. 2s. 6d. sewed, or $s. 6d. cloth.

Lectures on the Science
of Language.
By F. Max Mailer, M.A.

&c.

Eighth Edition. 2 vols. crown Svo. i6s.

Chips from a German

Workshop; being Essays
on the Science of Religion,
and on Mythology, Tradi-
tions, and Customs.
By F. Max Miiller, M.A.

4 vols. 8v0. £2. iSs.

Southeys Doctor, com-
plete in One Volume.
Edited by Rev. J. W.
Warier, B.D.

Square crown Svo. I2s. 6d.

Lectures delivered in
America in 1874.
By Charles Kingsley, late
Rector of Ever s ley.

Crown 8vo. 5-r.

Families of Speech.
Foiir Lectures delivered at
the Royal Institution.
By F. W. Farrar, D.D.

New Edition. Crown 8v0. 3-r. 6d.

Chapters on Language.
By F. W. Farrar, D.D.

New Edition. Crown Sz>0. $s.

A Budget of Paradoxes.
By Augustus De Morgan.

Reprinted, with Authors Additions, from
the Athenaeum. 8vo. 15^.

Apparitions ; a Narra-
tive of Facts.

By the Rev. B. W. Savile,
M.A. Author of ' The
Tricth of the Bible ' &c.

Cr<nvn &vo. price qs. 6d.

The Oration of Demos-
thenes on the Crown.
Translated by the Right
Hon. Sir R. P. Collier.

Crown Svo. $s.

Miscellaneous Writings

of John Conington, M.A.

Edited by J. A. Symonds,

M.A. With a Memoir

by H. J. S. Smith, M.A.

2 vols. Svo. 2%s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Recreations of a Country
Parson.
By A. K. H. B.

Two Series, i>s. 6d. each.

Landscapes, Churches,
and Moralities.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown *&vo.

Seaside Musings on Sun-
days and Weekdays.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown 8vo. $s. 6d.

Changed A spects of Un-
changed Truths.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown 8v0. $s. 6d.

Counsel and Comfort
from a City Pulpit.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown %vo. 3-r. 6d.

Lessons of Middle Age.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown %vo. "$s. 6d.

Leisure Hours in Town.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown 8zv. 3-r. 6d.

The Autumn Holidays
of a Country Parson.
By A. K. H. B:

Crown 8z/0. 3,?. 6d,

Sunday Afternoons at
the Parish Church of a
Scottish University City.
By A. K. H. B. \

Crown Sv0. 3^. 6^.

The Commonplace Phi-
losopher in Town and
Country.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown 8vo. 3-r. 6d.

Present-Day Thoughts.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown &vo. 3-$>- &/.

Critical Essays of a
Country Parson.
By A. K. H. B.

Crown Svo. 3^. 6^.

The Graver Thoughts of
a Country Parson.
By A. K. H. B.

Three Series, 3^. 6d. each.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

DICTIONARIES and OTHER BOOKS of
REFERENCE.

A Dictionary of the
English Language.

By R. G. Latham, M.A.
M.D. Founded on the
Dictionary of Dr. S.
Johnson, as edited by
the Rev. H. J. Todd,
with numerous Emenda-
tions and Additions.

4 vols. Afo. £j.

Thesaurus of Rnglish
Words and Phrases, classi-
fied and arranged so as to
facilitate the expression of
Ideas, and assist in Literary
Composition.

By P. M. Roget, M.D.

Crown 8vo. icxr. 6d.

English Synonymes.

ByE.J. Whately. Edited
by Archbishop Whately.

Fifth Edition. Fcp. Svo. &.

Handbook of the English

Language. For the use of
Students of the Universities
and the Higher Classes in
Schools.

By R. G. Latham, M.A.
M.D. &c. late Fellow of
King's College, Cam-
bridge; late Professor of
English in Univ. Coll.
Lond.

The Ninth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.

A Practical Dictionary
of the French and English
Languages.

By Ldon Contanseau, many
years French Examiner
for Military and Civil
Appointments, &c.

Post 8vo. 7-r. 6d.

Contanseau's Pocket Dic-
tionary, French and Eng-
lish, abridged from the
Practical Dictionary, by
the Aitthor.

Square l&mo. 3-r. 6d.

A New Pocket Dic-
tionary of the German and
English Languages.
By F. W. Longman, Bal-
liol College, Oxford.
Founded on Blackley and
Friedldnders Practical
Dictionary of the Ger-
man and English Lan-
guages.

Square \^>mo. price 5^.

A Dictionary of Roman

and Greek Antiquities.
With 2,000 Woodcuts
from Ancient Originals,
illustrative of the Arts
and Life of the Greeks and
Romans.
By Anthony Rich, B.A.

Third Edition. Crown $vo. *]s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

New Practical Diction-
ary of the German Lan-
g^lage ; German - English
and English-German.
By Rev. W. L. Blackley,

M.A. and Dr. C. M.

Friedldnder.

Post &'<?. yj. 6d.

The Mastery of Lan-
guages; or, the Art of
Speaking Foreign Tongues
Idiomatically.
By Thomas Prendergast.

Second Edition. %vo. 6s.

A Greek-English Lexi-
con.

By H. G. Liddell, D.D.
Dean of Chris tchurcky

and R. Scott, D.D.
Dean of Rochester.

Sixth Edition. Crown qto. $6s.

^4 Lexicon, Greek and
English, abridged for
Schools from Liddell and
Scotfs Greek - English
Lexicon.

Fourteenth Edition. Square I2mo. Js. 6d.

An English-Greek Lexi-
con, containing all the Greek
Words vised by Writers of
good authority.
By C. D. Yonge, M.A.

New Edition. 4/0. 2U.

Mr. C. D. Yonges New
Lexicon, English and
Greek, abridged from his
larger Lexicon.

Square I2mo. 8s. 6d.

Latin-English Dic-
tionary.

By John T. White, D.D.
Oxon. and J. E. Riddle,
M.A. Oxon.

Fifth Edition ', revised. I vol. 4/0. 28>r.

Whites College Latin-
English Dictionary;
abridged from the Parent
Work for the use of Uni-
versity Students.

Third Edition, Medium Svo. i$s.

A Latin-English Dic-
tionary adapted for the use
of Middle-Class Schools,
By John T. White, D.D.
Oxon.

Sqiiarefcp. 8v0. %s.

White s Junior Student's
Complete Latin - English
and English- Latin Dic-
tionary.

Square I2mo. 12s.

LATIN-ENGLISH, 7^. 6d.

M'Cullochs Dictionary,
Practical, Theoretical, and
Historical, of Commerce
and Commercial Naviga-
tion.

Edited by H. G. Reid.

Svo. 63-$-.
Supplement t price $s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

A General Dictionary
of Geography, Descriptive,
Physical, Statistical, and
Historical; forming a com-
plete Gazetteer of the World.

By A. Keith Johnston.

New Edition, thoroughly revised.

\In the press.

The Public Schools Ma-
nual of Modern Geography.
Forming a Companion to
' The Public Schools Atlas
of Modern Geography '

By Rev. G. Butler, M.A.

[In the press.

The Pitblic Schools A tlas
of Modern Geography. In
3 1 Maps, exhibiting clearly
the more important Physi-
calFeatures of the Coun-
tries delineated.
Edited, with Introduction^
by Rev. G. Butler, M.A.

Imperial &vo. price $s. doth ; or in imperial
4/0. 3-r. 6*/. sewed &° $s. cloth.

The Public Schools Atlas
of Ancient Geography.
Edited, with an Introduc-
tion on the Study of An-
cient Geography, by the
Rev. G. Butler, M.A.

Imperial Quarto. \In the press.

ASTRONOMY and METEOROLOGY.

The Universe and the

Coming Transits ; Re-
searches into and New
Views respecting the Con-
stitution of the Heavens.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

With 22 Charts and 22 Diagrams. 8vo. l6s.

Saturn and its System.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

2>vo. -with 14 Plates, 14^-.

The Transits of Vemts ;
A Popular Account of Past
and Coming Transits, from
the first observed by Hor-
rocks A.D. 1639 to the
Transit of A.D. 2012.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Second Edition, revised and enlarged, with
20 Plates (12 Coloured) and 27 Wood-
cuts. Crown Svo. Ss. 6d.

Essays on Astronomy^
A Series of Papers on
Planets and Meteors, the
Sun and Sun-surrounding
Space, Stars and Star
Cloudlets.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

With 10 Plates and 24 Woodcuts. 8vo. 125. .

The Moon ; her Motions^
Aspect, Scenery, and Phy-
sical Condition.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

With Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, and Luttar
Photographs. Crown Svo. i$s.

The Sun ; Ruler, Light,
Fire, and Life of the Pla-
netary System.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Second Edition. Plates and Woodcuts . Cr.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Orbs Around Us; a
Series of Familiar Essays
on the Moon and Planets,
Meteors and Comets, the
Sun and Coloured Pairs of
Suns.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Second Edition, with Chart and ^Diagrams.
Crown 8z>0. 'js. 6d.

Other Worlds than Ours;
The Plurality of Worlds
Studied under the Light
,of Recent Scientific Re-
searches.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

'Third Edition, with 14 Illustrations. Cr.
8vo. los.bd.

Brinkley's Astronomy.

Revised and partly re-writ-
ten, with Additional Chap-
ters, and an Appendix of
Questions for Examination.
£y John W. Stubbs, D.D.
.and F. Brunnow, Ph.D.

With 49 Diagrams. Crown Svo. 6s.

Outlines of Astronomy.
By Sir J. F. W. Herschel,
Bart. M.A.

Latest Edition, with Plates and Diagrams.
Square crown 8vo. 12s.

The Moon, and the Con-
dition and Configurations
of its Surface.
By Edmund Neison, Fellow
of the Royal Astrono-
mical Society &c.

Illustrated tv Maps and Plates.

[Nearly ready.

Celestial Objects for Com-
mon Telescopes.

By T. W. Webb, M.A.
F.R.A.S.

New Edition, with Map of the Moon and
Woodcuts. Crown %vo. *]$. 6d.

'By universal consent of observers in this
country, Mr. WEBB'S Celestial Objects has taken
the place of a standard text-book. With a book so
well known and so highly appreciated, we have
little more to do than to mention the appearance
of a new edition, which we know has been wanted for
some time, and which those who survey the glories
of the heavens will be anxious to obtain.'

The STUDENT.

A New Star Atlas, for
the Library, the School, and
the Observatory, in 1 2 Cir-
cular Maps (with 2 Index
Plates).

By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

Crown 8z/0. 5-r.

LargerStar Atlas, for the
Library, in Twelve Cir-
cular Maps, photolitho-
graphed by A. Brothers,
F.R.A.S. With 2 Index
Plates and a Letterpress
Introduction.
By R. A. Proctor, BA.

Second Edition. Small folio, 2$s.

Doves Law of Storms,

considered in connexion with
the ordinary Movements of
the Atmosphere.
Translated by R. H. Scott,
M.A.

Zvo. los. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Air and Rain ; the Be-
ginnings of a Chemical
Climatology.
By R.A. Smith, F.R.S.

%vo. 24J.

Air and its Relations to
Life, 1774-1874; a Course
of Lectures delivered at the
Royal Institution of Great
Britain in 1874, with some
Additions.

By Walter Noel Hartley,
F.C.S. Demonstrator of
Chemistry at King 's
College, London.

Small 8vo. with Illustrations, 6s.

Nautical Surveying, an
Introduction to the Practi-
cal and Theoretical Study
of.
By J. K. Laughton, M.A.

Small %vo. 6s.

S eke I lens SpectrumA na-
lysisy in its Application to
Terrestrial Substances and
the Physical Constitution of
the Heavenly Bodies.
Translated by Jane and
C. Lassell ; edited, with
Notes, by W. Huggins,
LL.D. F.R.S.

With 13 Plates and 223 Woodcuts. 8vo. 28^

NATURAL HISTORY and PHYSICAL
SCIENCE.

Professor Helmholtz*

Popular Lectures on Scien-
tific Subjects.
Translated by E. Atkinson,
F.C.S.

With many Illustrative Wood Engravings.
Sv0. I2s. 6d.

Ganofs Natural Philo-
sophy for General Readers
and Young Persons; a
Course of Physics divested
of Mathematical Formula
and expressed in the lan-
guage of daily life.

Translated by E. Atkinson,
F.C.S.

Second Edition, with 2 Plates and 429
Woodcuts. Crown Svo. Js. 6d.

The Correlation of Phy-
sical Forces.

By the Hon. Sir W. R.
Grove, F.R.S. &c.

Sixth Edition, with other Contributions to
Science. 8vo. i$s.

Weinholrfs Introduction
to Experimental Physics,
Theoretical and Practical ;
including Directions for
Constructing Physical Ap-
paratus and for Making
Experiments.

Translated by B. Loewy,
F.R.A.S. With a Pre-
face by G. C. Foster,
F.R.S.

With 3 Coloured Plates and 404 Woodcuts.
Svo. price 31 s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Ganofs Elementary
Treatise on Physics, Ex-
perimental and Applied,
for the itse of Colleges and
Schools.

Translated and edited by E.
Atkinson, P.C.S.

Seventh Edition, ivith 4 Coloured Plates o°
758 Woodcuts. PostZv*. i$s,

*i(* Problems and Examples in Physics,
an Appendix to the Seventh and other
Editions of Ganofs Elementary Trea-
tise. %vo. price is.

Text-Books of Science,
Mechanical and Physical,
adapted for the use of Arti-
sans and of Students in
Public and Science Schools.

Small 8vo. Woodcuts.

The following Text- Books
in this Series may now be
had : —

Anderson's Strength of Materials, 3^. 6d.
Armstrong's Organic Chemistry, 3-y. 6d.
Barry's Railway Appliances, %s. 6d.
Bloxam's Metals, 3.5-. 6d.
Goodeve's Mechanics, ^s. 6d.

Mechanism, %s. 6d.

Griffin's Algebra &> Trigonometry, 3^. 6d.

Notes on the same, "with Solutions, 3-r. 6d.
Jenkin's Electricity &> Magnetism, $s. 6d.
Maxwell's Theory of Heat, y. 6d.
Merrifield's Technical Arithmetic, 3-f. 6d.

Key, 3-r. 6d.

Miller's Inorganic Chemistry, 3^. 6d.
Preece and Sivewright's Telegraphy, 3^. 6d.
Shelley's Workshop Appliances, 3^. 6d.
Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis, 4^. 6d.
Thorpe and Muir's Qualitative Analysis^

3J. 6d.
Watson's Plane &> Solid Geometry, $s. 6d.

*#* Other Text-Books, in extension of this
Series, in active preparation.

Principles of Animal

Mechanics.

By the Rev. S. Haughton,
RR.S.

Second Edition. 8z>o. zis.

Fragments of Science.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

New Edition, crown Sz-o. ior. 6d.

Heat a Mode of Motion.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Fifth Edition, Plate and Woodcuts.
v0. los. 6d.

Sound.

By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Third Edition, including Recent Researches
on Fog- Signalling y Portrait and Wood-
cuts. Crown 8vo. icxr. 6d.

Researches on Diamag-
netism and Magne-Crystal-
lic Action; inc hiding Dia-
magnetic Polarity.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

With 6 Plates and many Woodcuts. 8vo. 14^.

Contributions to Mole-
cular Physics in the do-
main of Radiant Heat.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

With 2 Plates and 31 Woodcuts. $vo. l6s.

Six Lectures on Light,

delivered in America in

1872 and 1873.

By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Second Edition, with Portrait, Plate, and
59 Diagrams. Crown Sv0. TS. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

•21

Notes of a Course of Nine
Lectures on Light, delivered
at the Royal Institution.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Crown 8vo. is. sewed, or is. 6d. cloth.

Notes of a Course of
Seven Lectures on Electri-
cal Phenomena and Theo-
ries, delivered at the Royal
Institution.
By John Tyndall, F.R.S.

Croivn 8vo. is. sewed, or is. 6d. cloth.

A Treatise on Magnet-
ism, General and Terres-
trial.
ByH.Lloyd,D.D. D.C.L.

8vo. price los. 6d.

Elementary Treatise on
the Wave-Theory of Light.
By H. Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L.

Third Edition. %vo. lOs. 6d.

The Comparative Ana-
tomy and Physiology of the
Vertebrate Animals.
By Richard Owen, F.R.S.

With 1,472 Woodcuts, ^vols. Svo. £3. iy.6J.

Sir H. Holland's Frag-
mentary Papers on Science
and other sitbjects.
Edited by the Rev. J. Hol-
land.

%vo. price 14?.

Kirby and Spences In-
troduction to Entomology,
or Elements of the Natural
History of Insects.

Crown 2>vo. $s.

Light Science for Lei-
sure Hoiirs ; Familiar Es-
says on Scientific Subjects,
Natiiral Phenomena, &c.

By R. A. Proctor, B.A.

First and Second Series. 2 vols. crown 8vo.
Js. 6d. each.

Homes without Hands ;
a Description of the Habi-
tations of Animal's, classed
according to their Principle
of Construction.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With about 140 Vignettes on Wood. Svo. l^s.

Strange Dwellings ; a De-
scription of the Habitations
of Animals, abridged from
' Homes without Hands'

By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With Frontispiece and 60 Woodcuts. Crown
%vo. s. 6d.

Insects at Home; a Popu-
lar Account of British
Insects, their Structure
Habits, and Transforma-
tions.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With upwards 0/700 Woodcuts. 2>vo. 2is.

Insects Abroad ; being a
Popidar Account of Foreign
Insects, their Structure, Ha-
bits, and Transformations.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With upwards of 700 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21 s

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Out of Doors ; a Selec-
tion of Original Articles
on Practical Natural His-
tory.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With 6 Illustrations from Original Designs
engraved on Wood. Crown 8vo. ?s. 6d.

Bible Animals ; a De-
scription of every Living
Creature mentioned in the
Scriptures, front the Ape
to the Coral.
By Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A.

With about 1 12 Vignettes on Wood. Svo. 14^.

The Polar World: a
Popular Description of
Man and Nature in the
Arctic and Antarctic Re-
gions of the Globe.
By Dr. G. Hartwig.

With Chromoxylographs, Maps, and Wood-
cuts. 8vo. io.y. 6d.

The Sea and its Living
Wonders.
By Dr. G. Hartwig.

Fourth Edition, enlarged. 8vo. with many
Illustrations, los. 6d.

The Tropical World.
By Dr. G. Hartwig.

With about 200 Illustrations. 8vo. los. 6d.

The Subterranean World.
By Dr. G. Hartwig.

With. Maps and Woodcuts. Svo. los. 6d.

The Aerial World; a
Popular Account of the
Phenomena and Life of
the Atmosphere.
By Dr. George Hartwig.

With Map, 8 Chromoxylographs, and 60
Woodcuts. Svo. frice 2is.

Game Preservers and
Bird Preservers, or ' Which
are our Friends f '
By George Francis Morant,
late Captain \ith Royal
Lancers & Major Cape
Mounted Riflemen.

Crown Svo. price 5-r.

A Familiar History of
Birds.

By E. Stanley, D.D. late
Ld. Bishop of 'Norwich.

Fcp. Svo. with Woodcuts, 3.?. 6d.

Rocks Classified and De-
scribed.
By B. Von Cotta.

English Edition, by P. H. LAWRENCE (with
English, German, and French Syno-
nymes), revised by the Author. Post

Excavations at the Kess-
lerloch near Thayngen,
Switzerland, a Cave of the
Reindeer Period.
By Conrad Merk. Trans-
lated by John Edward
Lee, F.S.A. F.G.S. Au-
thor of 'I sea Silurum '
&c.

With Sixteen Plates. Royal Svo. fs. 6d.

The Origin of Civilisa-
tion, and the Primitive
Condition of Man; Men-
tal and Social Condition of
Savages.

By Sir J. Lubbock, Bart.
M.P. F.R.S.

Third Edition, with 25 Woodcuts. Svo. iSs.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Native Races of the
Pacific States of North
America.
By Hubert Howe Bancroft.

Vol. I. Wild Tribes, their Manners
and Customs ; with 6 Maps. &vo. 2$s.

Vol. II. Native Races of the Pacific
States. Svo. 2$s.

Vol. III. Myths and Languages. %vo.
price 2$s.

Vol. IV. Antiquities and Architectural
Remains, with Map. 8v0. 2$s.

Vol. V. Aboriginal History and Migra-
tions ; Index to the Entire Work. With
2 Maps, Suo. 2$s.

*#* This work may now be had complete in
5 'volumes, pi'ice £6. $s.

The Ancient Stone Im-
plement sy Weapons, and Or-
naments of Great Britain.
By John Evans, F.R.S.

With 2 Plates and 476 Woodcuts. Svo. 2%s.

The Elements of Botany

for families and Schools.

Eleventh Edition, revised

by Thomas Moor e^F.L.S.

Fcp. Svo. with 154 Woodcuts, 2s. 6d.

The Rose Amateur's

Guide.

By Thomas Rivers.

Tenth Edition. Fcp. &vo. 4*.

On the Sensations of
Tone, as a Physiological
Basis for the Theory of
Music.

By H. Helmholtz, Pro-
fessor of Physiology in
the University of Berlin.
Translated by A. J. Ellis,
F.R.S.

A Dictionary of Science,
Literature, and Art.
Re-edited by the late W. T.
Brande (the A uthor) and
Rev. G. W. Cox, M.A.

New Edition, revised. 3 vols. medium 8vo. 6$s.

The History of Modern

Music, a Course of Lec-
tures delivered at the Royal
Institiition of Great Bri-
tain.
By John Hullah.

New Edition. Demy 8vo. 8s. 6d.

The Transition Period
of Musical History; a
Second Course of Lectures
on the History of Music
from the Beginning of the
Seventeenth to the Middle
of tJie Eighteenth Century,
delivered at the Royal In-
stitution.
By John Hullak.

New Edition, I vol. demy %>vo.

[In the Spring.

The Treasury of Botany,
or Popular Dictionary of
the Vegetable Kingdom ;
with which is incorporated
a Glossary of Botanical
Terms.
Edited by J. Lindley,

F.R.S. and T. Moore,

F.L.S.

With 274 Woodcuts and 20 Steel Plates.
Two Parts, fcp. 8vo. 12s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

A General System of
Descriptive and Analytical
Botany.

Translated from theFrench
of Le Maout and De-
caisne, by Mrs. Hooker.
Edited and arranged
according to the English
Botanical System, by J.
D. Hooker, M.D. &c.
Director of the Royal
Botanic Gardens, Kew.

With 5, 500 Woodcuts. Imperial Svo. 3 1 s. 6d.

London's Encyclopedia
of Plants ; comprising the
Specific Character, Descrip-
tion, Culture, History, &c.
of all the Plants found in
Great Britain.

With upwards ofi 2, ooo Woodcuts. Svo. 42*.

Handbook of Hardy
Trees, Shrubs, and Her-
baceous Plants; containing
Descriptions &c. of the
Best Species in Cultivation;
with Ciiltural Details,
Comparative Hardiness,
suitability for particular
positions, &c. Based on
the French Work of De-
caisne and Naudin, and
including the 720 Original
Woodcut Illustrations.
By W. B. Hemsley.

Medium 8vo. 2 is.

Forest Trees and Wood-
land Scenery, as described
in Ancient and Modern
Poets.

By William Menzies, De-
puty Surveyor of Wind-
sor Forest and Parks, &c.

With Twenty Chromolithographic Plates.
Folio, price £$. $s.

CHEMISTRY and PHYSIOLOGY.

Miller s Elements of
Chemistry, Theoretical and
Practical.

Re-edited, with Additions,
by H. Macleod, F.C.S.

3 vols. Svc.

PART I. CHEMICAL PHYSICS, 15^.
PART II. INORGANIC CHEMISTRY, 2is.
PART III. ORGANIC CHEMISTRY, New
Edition in the pi-ess.

Health in the House,

Twenty -five Lectures on
Elementary Physiology in
its Application to the Daily
Wants of Man and Ani-
mals.
By Mrs. C. M. Buckton.

New Edition. Crown Svo. Woodcuts, 2s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Outlines of Physiology,
Human and Comparative.
By J. Marshall, F.R.C.S.
Siirgeon to the Univer-
sity College Hospital.

2 vols. cr. 8vo. with 122 Woodcuts, 32 s.

Select Methods in Chemi-
cal Analysis, chiefly Inor-
ganic.
By Wm. Crookes, F.R.S.

With 22 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. I2s. 6d.

A Dictionary of Che-
mistry and the Allied
Branches of other Sciences.
By Henry Watts, F.C.S.
assisted by eminent
Scientific and Practical
Chemists.

6 vols. medium %vo. £8. 14?. 6d.

Supplement completing
the Record of Discovery to
the year 1873.

8w. price 42$.

The FINE ARTS and ILLUSTRATED
EDITIONS.

Poems.

By William B. Scott.

T. Ballads and Tales. II. Studies from
Nature. III. Sonnets &c.

Illustrated by Seventeen Etchings by
L. Alma Tadema and William B. Scott.
Crown 8vo. i$s.

Half-hour Lectures on
the History and Practice
of the Fine and Ornamen-
tal Arts.
By W. B. Scott.

Third Edition, with 50 Woodcuts. Crown
%vo. &r. 6<t.

A Dictionary of Artists
of the English School:
Painters, Sculptor s> Archi-
tects, Engravers, and Orna-
mentists ; with Notices of
their Lives and Works.
By Samuel Redgrave.

Svo. i6s.
A 4

In Fairyland ; Pictures
from the Elf- World. By
Richard Doyle. With a
Poem by W. Allingham.

With 1 6 coloured Plates, containing 36 De-
signs. Second Edition, folio, i$s.

The New Testament, il-
lustrated with Wood En-
gravings after the Early
Masters, chiefly of the
Italian School.

Croiun 4/0. 63^.

Lord Macaulay's Lays
of Ancient Rome. With
90 Ilhcstrations on Wood
from Drawings by G.
Scharf.

Fcp. qto. 2 is.

Miniature Edition, with
Scharf s 90 Illustrations

reduced in Lithography.

Imp. i6ino. IOJ-. 6</.

26 NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Moore s Irish Melodies,
Maclises Edition, with 1 6 1
Steel Plates.

Super royal $>vo. 31 s. 6d.

Sacred and Legendary
Art.
By Mrs. Jameson.

6 vols. square crown *&vo. price £$. \$s. 6d.
as follows : —

Legends of the Saints

and Martyrs.

New Edition, with 19 Etchings and 187
Woodcuts. 2 vols. U. 6d.

Legends of the Monastic
Orders.

New Edition^ with II Etchings and 88
Woodcuts, i vol. 2, is.

Legends of the Madonna.

New Edition, with 27 Etchings and 165
Woodcuts, i vol. 21 s.

The History of Our Lord,
with that of his Types and
Preciirsors.

Completed by Lady East-
lake.

Revised Edition, with 13 Etchings and 281
Woodcuts. 2 vols. 42J-.

The USEFUL ARTS, MANUFACTURES/ &c.

Industrial Chemistry ; a
Manual for Manufactu-
rers and for Colleges or
Technical Schools. Being a
Translation of Professors
Stohmann and Englers
German Edition of Pay ens
' Pre'cis de Chimie Indus-
trie lie' by Dr. J . D. Barry.
Edited, and supplemented
with Chapters on the
Chemistry of the Metals,
by B. H. Paul, Ph.D.

8vo. with Plates and Woodcuts.

\In the press.

Gwilfs Encyclopedia of
Architecture, with above
i, 600 Woodcuts.
New Edition (1876), with
Alterations and Addi-
tions, by Wyatt Pap-
worth.

Svo. 52*. 6d.

The Three Cathedrals
dedicated to St. Paul in
London ; their History
from the Foundation of
the First Building in the
Sixth Century to the Pro-
posals for the Adornment
of the Present Cathedral.
By W. Longman, F.S.A.

With numerous Illustrations. Square crown
8vo. 21 s.

Lathes and Turning,
Simple, Mechanical, and
Ornamental.
By W. Henry Northcott.

With 240 Illustrations. %vo. 18^.

Hin ts on Household
Taste in Furniture, Up-
holstery, and other Details.
By Charles L. East lake,
Architect.

STew Edition, with about 90 Illustrations.
Square crown 8vo. 14^.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Handbook of Practical

Telegraphy.

By R. S. Culley, Memb.
Inst. C.E. Engineer-in-
Chief of Telegraphs to
the Post-Office.

Sixth Edition, Plates 6^ Woodcuts. Svo. i6s.

A Treatise on the Steam

Engine, in its various ap-
plications to Mines, Mills,
Steam Navigation, Rail-
ways and Agriculture.

By J. Bourne, C.E.

With Portrait, 37 Plates, and 546 Wood-
cuts. 4/0. 42J.

Catechism of the Steam
Engine, in its various Ap-
plications.

By John Bourne, C.E.

New Edition, -with^g Woodcuts. Fcp.%vo.6s.

Handbook of the Steam
Engine.

By J. Bourne, C.E. form-
ing a KEY to theAiithors
Catechism of the Steam
Engine.

With 67 Woodcuts. Fcp. %vo. $s.

Recent Improvements in
the Steam Engine.
By J . Bourne, C.E.

With 124 Woodcuts. Fcp, Svo. 6s.

Encyclopedia of Civil

Engineering, Historical,
Theoretical, and Practical.
By E. Cresy, C.E.

With above 3, ooo Woodcuts. 8vo. 42 s.

Ure's Dictionary of A rts>
Manufactures, and Mines.
Seventh Edition, re-written
and greatly enlarged by
R. Himt, F.R.S. assisted
by numerous Contributors.

With 2,100 Woodcuts. 3 vols. medium 8vo.
Price £$. 5-r.

Practical Treatise on

Metallurgy,

Adapted from the last Ger-
man Edition of Professor
Kerfs Metallurgy by W.
Crookes, F.R.S. &c. and
E. Rohrig, Ph.D.

3 vols. Svo. with 625 Woodcuts. £$. igs.

Treatise on Mills and
Millwork.
By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt.

With 1 8 Plates and 322 Woodcuts. 2 vols.

Useful Information for
Engineers.
By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt.

With many Plates and Woodcuts. 3 vols.
crown 8sv<?. 3U. 6d.

The Application of Cast
and Wrought Iron to
Building Piirposes.
By Sir W. Fairbairn, Bt.

With 6 Plates and 118 Woodcuts. Svo. i6s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Theory of Strains
in Girders and similar
Striictures, zvith Observa-
tions on the application of
Theory to Practice, and
Tables of the Strength and
other Properties of Ma-
terials.

By Bindon B. Stoney, M.A.
M. Inst. C.E.

New Edition, royal %vo. ivith 5 Plates and
123 Woodcuts, 36 s.

Practical Handbook of

Dyeing and Calico-Print-
ing.
By W. Crookes, F.R.S. &c.

With numerous Illustrations and Specimens
of Dyed Textile Fabrics. 8vo. 42^.

Occasional Papers on

Subjects connected with
Civil Engineering, Gun-
nery, and Naval Archi-
tectiire.
By Michael Scott, Memb.

Inst. C.E. & of Inst.

N.A.

2 vols. Svo. with Plates, qzs.

Mitchell's Manual of
Practical Assaying.
Foiirth Edition, revised,
with the Recent Disco-
veries incorporated, by
W. Crookes, F.R.S.

crown Sv0. Woodcuts, 31$. 6d.

Naval Powers and their
Policy : with Tabiilar
. Statements of British and
Foreign Ironclad Navies ;
giving Dimensions, Arm-
our, Details of Armament,
Engines, Speed, and other
Particulars.

By John C. Paget.

8v0. price los. 6d. cloth.

London's Encyclopedia

of Gardening ; comprising
the Theory and Practice of
Horticulture^ Floriculture^

Arboriculture, and Land-
scape Gardening.

With l,ooo Woodcuts. 8vo. 2 is.

London s Encyclopedia
of Agriculture ; comprising
the Laying-out, Improve-
ment, and Management of
Landed Property, and the
Cultivation and Economy
of the Prodiictions of Agri-
cultiire.

With 1,100 Woodcuts. 8vo. 2is.

Reminiscences of Fen
and Mere.
By J. M. Heathcote.

With 27 Illustrations and 3 Maps. Squart
8vo. price 28^.

NEW WORKS PUBL.SHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

RELIGIOUS and MORAL WORKS.

An Exposition of the 39
Articles, Historical and
Doctrinal.

By E. H. Browne, D.D.
Bishop of Winchester.

New Edition. 8v0. i6s.

Historical Lectures on
the Life of Our Lord Jes^ls
Christ.
By C. J. Ellicott, D.D.

Fifth Edition. 2>vo. I2s.

An Introduction to the
Theology of the Church of
England, in an Exposition
of the 39 Articles. By Rev.
T. P. Boultbee, LL.D.

Fcp. %vo. 6s.

Three Essays on Reli-
gion : Nature ; the Utility
of Religion; Theism.
By John Stuart Mill.

Second Edition. &ve. price IOT. 6d.

Sermons Chiefly on the
Interpretation of Scrip-
tiire.

By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

8v0. price JS. 6d.

Sermons preached in the
Chapel of Riigby School ;
with an Address before
Confirmation.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

Fcp. 8vo. pi'ice 3-r. 6d.

Christian Life, its

Course, its Hindrances,
and its Helps ; Sermons
preached mostly in the
Chapel of Rugby School.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

Svo. JS. 6d.

Christian Life, its
Hopes, its Fears, and its
Close; Sermons preached
mostly in the Chapel of
Rtigby School.
By the late Rev. Thomas
Arnold, D.D.

Svo. "js. 6d.

Religion and Science,
their Relations to Each
Other at t'he Present
Day; Three Essays on
the Grounds of Religious
Beliefs.

By Stanley T. Gibson, B.D.
Rector of Sandon, in
Essex; and late Fellow
of Queens College, Cam-
bridge,

Svo. price los. 6d.

Notes on the Earlier
Hebrew Scriptures.
By Sir G. B. Airy, K.C.B.

8vo. price fa.

Synonyms of the Old Tes-
tament, their Bearing on
Christian Faith and
Practice.
By Rev. R. B. Girdlestone.

&vo. i$s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Primitive and Ca-
tholic Faith in Relation to
the Chiirch of England.
By the Rev. B. W. Savile,
M.A . Rector of Shilling-
ford, Exeter.

%vo. price Js.

The Eclipse of Faith ;

or a Visit to a Religious

Sceptic.

By Henry Rogers.

Latest Edition. Fcp. Svo. 55.

Defence of the Eclipse of
Faith.
By Henry Rogers.

Latest Edition. Fcp. %vo. 3*. 6d.

A Critical and Gram-
matical Commentary on St.
Paul's Epistles.
By C. J. Ellicott, D.D.

%vo. Galatians, 8s. 6d. Ephesians, Ss. 6d.
Pastoral Epistles, lew. 6d. Philippi-
ans, Colossians, & Philemon, los. 6d.
Thessalonians, 'js. 6d.

The Life and Epistles of
St. Paul.
By Rev. W. J . Conybeare,

M.A. and Very Rev. J.

S. Howson, D.D.

LIBRARY EDITION, with all the Original
Illustrations ; Maps, Landscapes on Stetlt
Woodcuts, &c. 2 vols. ^to. 42*.

INTERMEDIATE EDITION, with a Selection
of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 2 vols.
square crown %>vo. 21 s.

STUDENT'S EDITION, revised and condensed,
with 46 Illustrations and Maps. I vol.
crown &z>0. ^.

An Examination into
the Doctrine and Practice
of Confession.
By the Rev. W. E. Jelf,
B.D.

Sve. price 3-r. 6d.

Evidence of the Truth
of the Christian Religion
derived from the Literal
Fulfilment of Prophecy.
By Alexander Keith, D.D.

tpth Edition, with numerous Plates.
Square %vo. I2s. bd. or in post 8vo.
with 5 Plates, 6s.

Historical and Critical
Commentary on the Old
Testament; with a New
Translation.
By M. M. Kalisch, Ph.D.

Vol. 7. Genesis, $>vo. \%s. or adapted for the
General Reader, I2s. Vol. //. Exodus,
15.?. or adapted for the General Reader,
12s. Vol. III. Leviticus, Part I. \$s.
or adapted for the General Reader, Ss.
Vol. IV. Leviticus, Part II. \$s. or
adapted for the General Reader ; Ss.

The History and Litera-
ture of the Israelites, ac-
cording to the Old Testa-
ment and the Apocrypha.
By C. De Rothschild and
A. De Rothschild.

Second Edition. 2 vols. erowntovo. I2s. 6d.
Abridged Edition, in I vol. fcp. Svo. y. 6d.

Ewald's History of
Israel.

Translated from the Ger-
man by J. E. Carpenter,
M.A. with Preface by
R. Martineau, M.A.

5 vols. 8vo. 6$s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Ewald's Antiquities of
Israel.

Translated from the Ger-
man by Henry Shaen
Solly, M.A.

&vo. I2s. 6d.

The Types of Genesis,

briefly considered as reveal-
ing the Development of
Hitman Nature.
By Andrew Jukes.

Third Edition. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d.

The Second Death and
the ^Restitution of all

Things; with some Pre-
liminary Remarks on the
Nature and Inspiration of
Holy Scripture.
By Andrew Jukes.

Fourth Edition. Crcnvn 8vo. 3^. 6d.

Commentary on Epistle
to the Romans.
By Rev. W. A. O'Conor.

Crown 8v0. 3^. 6d,

A Commentary on the
Gospel of St. John.
By Rev. W. A. (J Conor.

Crown %vo. los. 6d.

The Epistle to the He-
brews; with Analytical
Introduction and Notes.
By Rev. W. A. OJ Conor.

Crown $vo. qs. 6d.

Some Questions of the

Day.

By Elizabeth M. Sewell,
Author of 'Amy Her-
bert] 'Passing Thoiights
on Religion? &c.

Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.

An Introduction to the
Stiidy of the New Testa-
ment, Critical, Exegetical,
and Theological.
By the Rev. S. Davidson,
D.D. LL.D.

2 vols. 8vo. price y>s.

Thoughts for the Age.
By Elizabeth M. SewelL

Neiu Edition. Fcp. Svo. 3^. 6d.

Preparation for the Holy

Communion ; the Devotions
chiefly from the works of
Jeremy Taylor.
By Elizabeth M. SewelL

3-r.

Bishop Jeremy Taylor s
Entire Works ; with Life
by Bishop Heber.
Revised and corrected by
the Rev. C. P. Eden.

10 vols. £$. $j.

Hymns of Praise and
Prayer.

Collected and edited by Rev.
J. Martineau, LL.D.

Crown Svo. 4$-. 6d. $2mo. is. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Spiritiial Songs for the
Simdays and Holidays
throughout the Year.
ByJ. S. B. Monsell, LL.D.

Thousand. Fcp. &vo. $s

Lyra Gennanica; Hymns
translated from the German
by Miss C. Winkworth.

Fcp. Svo. 5-f.

Lectures on the Penta-
teuch & the Moabite Stone;
with Appendices.
By J. W. Colenso, D.D.
Bishop of Natal.

%VO. I2J.

Endeavours after the
Christian Life; Discourses.
By Rev. J. Martineau,
LL.D.

Fifth Edition. Crown %vo. 'js. 6d.

Supernatural Religion ;
an Inquiry into the Reality
of Divine Revelation.

Sixth Edition carefully revised, with So pages
of New Preface. 2 vols. Svo. 24^.

The Pentateuch and Book
of Joslma Critically Ex-
amined.

By J. W. Colenso, D.D.
Bishop of Natal.

Crown 8vo. 6s.

TRAVELS, VOYAG-ES, . &e.

The Indian Alps, and
How we Crossed them :
being a Narrative of Two
Years Residence in the
Eastern Himalayas, and
Two Months To^cr into the
Interior, towards Kinchin-
junga and Mount Everest.
By a Lady Pioneer.

With Illustrations from Original Drawings
made on the sfiot by the Authoress.
Imperial %vo. 42^.

Tyrol and the Tyrolese ;
being an Account of the
People and the Land, in
their Social, Sporting, and
Mountaineering Aspects.
ByW.A. Baillie Grohman.

With numerous Illustrations from Sketches
by the Author. Crown 8vo. 14^.

' The Frosty Caucasus ;
an Account of a Walk
through Part of the Range,
and of an Ascent of Elbriiz
in the Summer of\% 74.
By F. C. Grove.

With Eight Illustrations engraved on Wood
by £. Whymper, from Photographs
taken during the Journey -, and a Map.
Crcnvn Svo. price 1 5 s.

A Journey of\ ,000 Miles

throiigh Egypt and Niibia
to the Second Cataract of
the Nile. Being a Personal
Narrative of Four and a
Half Months Life in a
Dahabeeyah on the Nile.
By Amelia B. Edwards.

With numerous Illustrations from Drawings
by the Authoress, Map, Plans, Fac-
similes, &c. Imperial 8m

[/;/ the Autumn.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Over the Sea and Far
Away ; being a Narrative
of a Ramble round the
World.

By Thos. Woodbine Hinch-
Kff, M.A. F.R.G.S.
President of the Alpine
Club, Author of 'Sum-
mer Months among the
r/ &c.

\vo. ivith numerous IUus-
\ffearly ready.

I vol. medium
trations.

Discoveries at Epkesus.
Including the Site and Re-
mains of the Great Temple
of Diana.
By J. T. Wood, F.S.A.

I vol. imperial $>vo. copiously illustrated.

\_In the press.

Through Bosnia and the
Herzegovina on Foot during
the Insurrection, Aiigust
and September 1875; with
a Glimpse at the Slavonic
Borderlands of Turkey.
By Arthur J. Evans, B.A.
F.S.A.

Post 8vo. ivitk Map and numerous Illus-
trations. [/;/ tJie press.

Italian Alps ; Sketches
in the Mountains ofTicino,
Lombardy, the Trentino,
and Venetia.
By Douglas W. Freshfield,

Editor of ( The Alpine

Journal!

Square crown $vo. Illustrations. \$s.

Memorials of the Dis-

covery and Early Settle-

ment of the Bermudas or

Sorners Islands, from 1615

to 1685. Compiled from

the Colonial Records and

other original sources.

By Major-General J. H.

Lefroy, R.A. C.B.

F.R.'S. Hon. Member

New York Historical

Society, &c. Governor

of the Bermudas.

Svo. with Map. [/// the press.

Here and There in the
Alps.

By the Hon. Frederica
Phtnket.

With Vignctte-iitle. Post 8vo. 6s. 6d.

The Valleys of Tirol ;
their Traditions and C^ls-
toms, and How to Visit
them.
By Miss R. H. Busk.

With Frontispiece and 3 Maps. Crmvn

%7M. J2S. 6(t.

Two Years in Fiji, a
Descriptive Narrative of a
Residence in the Fijian
Group of Islands; with
some Account of the For-
tunes of Foreign Settlers
and Colonists lip to the time
of British Annexation.
By Litton Forbes, M.D.

Crown

. (.d.

NEW WORKS PUBL.SHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Eight Years in Ceylon.
By Sir Samuel W. Baker,
M.A.F.R.G.S.

New Edition, with Illustrations engraved
on Wood by G. Pearson. Crown 8u0.
Price Js. 6d.

The Rifle and the Hound
in Ceylon.

By Sir Samuel W. Baker,
M.A. F.R.G.S.

New Edition, with Illustrations engraved
on Wood by G. Pearson. Crown ¥>vo.
Psics 7-r. 6d.

Meeting the S^tn ; a
Journey all round the
World through Egypt,
China, Japan, and Cali-
fornia.

By William Simpson,
F.R.G.S.

With Heliotypes and Woodcuts. %vo. 24.?.

The Dolomite Mo^tn-
tains. Excursions through
Tyrol, Carinthia, Carniola,
and Friuli.

By J. Gilbert and G. C.
Churchill, F.R.G.S.

With Illustrations. Sq. cr. 8vo. 2 is.

The Alpine Club Map
of the Chain of Mont
Blanc, from an actual Sur-
vey in 1863-1864.
By A. Adams-Reilly,
F.R.G.S. M.A.C.

In Chromolithography, on extra stout draw-
ing paper los. or mounted on canvas
in a folding case, I2s. 6d.

The Alpine Club Map
of the Valpelline, the Val
Tournanche, and the South-
ern Valleys of the Chain of
Monte Rosa, from actual
Survey.

By A. Adams-Reilly ,
F.R.G.S. M.A.C.

Price 6s. on extra Stout Drawing Paper, or
7.:. 6d. mounted in a Folding Case.

Untrodden Peaks and

Unfrequented Valleys ; a
Midsummer Ramble among
the Dolomites.
By Amelia B. Edwards.

With numerous Illustrations. $>vo. 2is.

The Alpine Club Map
of Switzerland, with parts
of the Neighbouring Coun-
tries, on the scale of Four
Miles to an Inch.

Edited by R. C. Nichols,
F.S.A. F.R.G.S.

In Four Sheets, in Portfolio, price 42*.
coloured, or 34^. uncoloured.

The Alpine Guide.
By John Ball, M.R.I.A.
late President of the
Alpine Chib.

Post %>vo. 'with Maps and other Illustrations.

Eastern Alps.

Price IOJ-. 6d.

Central Alps, including
all the Oder land District.

Price Is. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Western Alps, inc hiding

Mont Blanc, Monte Rosa,
Zermatt, &c.

Price 6s. 6d.

Introduction on Alpine
Travelling in general, and
on the Geology of the Alps.

Price I s. Either of the Three Volumes or Parts
of the 'Alpine Guide' may bt had with
this Introduction prefixed, is. extra.
The '•Alpine Guide1 may also be had
in Ten separate Parts, or districts, price
2s. 6d. each.

Giiide to the Pyrenees, for
the use of Mountaineers.
By Charles Packe.

Second Edition, ^vith Maps &c. and Ap-
pendix. Crown $>vo. Js. 6d.

How to See Norway;
embodying the Experience
of Six Summer Tours in
that Country.
By J. R. Campbell.

With Map and 5 Woodcuts, fcp. %vo. $s.

WORKS of FICTION,

Higgledy-Piggledy; or,
Stories for Everybody and
Everybody's Children.
By the Right Hon. E. H.
Knatchbull - Hugessen,
M.P. Author of ' Whis-
pers from Fairyland '
&c.

With 9 Illustrations from Original Designs
by R. Doyle, engraved on Wood by
G. Pearson. Croivn 8v0. price 6s.

Whispers from Fairy-
land.
By the Rt. Hon. E. H.

Knatchbull - Hugessen,
M.P. Author of ' Hig-
gledy-Piggledy' &c.

With 9 Illustrations from Original De-
signs engraved on IVood by G. Pear-
son. Croiun &z>0. price 6s.

' A series of stories which are certain of a ready
welcome by al! boys and girls who take delight in
" dreamland, and love to linger over the pranks and
frolics of fairies. The book is dedicated to the
mothers of England, and more wholesome food for
the growing mind it would be unreasonable to desire,

and impossible to procure This welcome

volume abounds in vivacity and fun, and bears
pleasant testimony to a kindly-hearted Author with
fancy, feeling, and humour.' MORNING POST.

The Folk-Lore of Rome,
collected by Word of Moic th
from the People.
By Miss R. H. Busk.

Crown %>vo. I2s. 6d.

Beckers Galhts; or Ro-
man Scenes of the Time of
Augustus.

Post %vo. 7-r. 6d.

Becker's Charicles : Il-
lustrative of Private Life
of the Ancient Greeks.

Post %vo. 7s. 6d.

Novels and Tales.

By the Right Hon. Benja-
min Disraeli, M.P.

Cabinet Editions, complete in Ten Volumes^
crown Svo. 6s. each, as follows : —

Lothair, 6s.
Coningsby, 6s.
Sybil, 6s.
Tancred, 6s.

Venetia, 6s.
Alroy, Ixion, &>c. 6s.
Young Duke, &>c. 6s.
Vivian Grey, 6s.

Henrietta Temple, 6s.
Contarini Fleming, &>c. 6s.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

The Modern Novelist's
Library.

Atherstone Priory, 2s. boards ; 2s. 6d. doth.

Mile. Mori, 2s. boards ; 2s. 6d. cloth.

'J7ie Burgomaster s Family, 2s. and 2s. (>d.

MELVILLE'S Digby Grand, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Gladiators, 2s. and 2s.6d.

Good for Not/i ing, 2 s. &2s. 6d.

Holmby House, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Interpreter, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Kate Coventry, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

Queens Maries, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

General Bounce, 2s. and 2s. 6d.

TROLLOPE'S Warden, is. 6d. and 2s.

Barchester Towers, 2s. & 2s. 6J.

BRAMLEY-MOORE'S Six Sisters of the Val-
leys, 2s. boards ; 2s. 6d. cloth.

Elsa : a Tale of the Tyrolean Alps. Trans-
lated from the German of Mine, l^on
Hillem by Lady Wallace. Price 2s.
boards ; 2s. 6d. cloth.

Tales of Ancient Greece.
By the Rev. G. W. Cox,
M.A.

Crown Svo. 6s. 6d.

Stories and Tales.

By Elizabeth M. Sewell.
Cabinet Edition, in Ten
Volumes : —

Amy Herbert, 2s. 6d. \ Ivors, 2s. 6d.
Gei'trude, 2s. 6d. Katharine Ashton,

EarFs Daughter, 2s. 6d.

2s. 6d. Margaret Percival,

Experience of Life, \ -$s. 6d.

2s. 6a.
Cleve Hall, 2s. 6d.

Laneton Parsonage>

Ursula, 3^-. 6d.

POETRY and THE DRAMA.

Ballads and Lyrics of
Old France; with other
Poems.
By A. Lang, M.A.

Square ftp. %vo. $s.

The London Series of

French Classics.

Edited by Ch. Cassal,
LL.D. T. Karcher,
LL.B. and Ldonce Sti-
evenard.

The following Plays, in the Division of
the Drama in this Series, are now ready : —
CORNEILLE'S Le Cid, is. 6d.
VOLTAIRE'S Zaire, is. 6d.
LAMARTINE'S Tons&aint Louvertnrey double
volume, 2s. 6d.

Milton s Lycidas and
Epitaphium Damonis.
Edited, with Notes and

Introd^^,ction, by C. S.

Jerram, M.A.

Crown Svo. 2s. 6d.

Lays of Ancient Rome ;
with Ivry and the Ar-
mada.

By the Right Hon. Lord
Macaulay.

i6mo. 3-r. 6d.

Lord Maca^llay>s Lays
of Ancient Rome. With
90 Illustrations on Wood
from Drawings by G.
Scharf.

Fcp.

Miniature Edition of
Lord Macaulays Lays
of Ancient Rome, with
Scharf's 90 I Illustrations
rediiced in Lithography.

Imp.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Horatii Opera, Library
Edition, with English
Notes, Marginal References
and various Readings.
Editedby Rev.J .E. Yonge,
M.A.

8v0. 2 is.

Sotitheys Poetical JVorks
ivith the A^lthors last Cor-
rections and Additions.

Medium %vo. ivith Portrait, 14^.

Bowdlers Family Shak-
speare, cheaper Gemiine
Edition.

Complete in I vol. medium 8v0. large type,
id it h 36 Woodcut Illustrations, 14^. or
in 6 vols. fcp. Svo. price 2is.

Poems by Jean Inge low.

2 vols. Fcp. $z>0. los.

FIRST SERIES, containing 'Divided,' ' The
Star's Monument? &c. i6t/i Thousand.
Fcp. Svo. 5-r-

SECOND SERIES, (A Story of Doom? 'Gla-
dys and her Island? &>c. $th Thousand.
Fcp. 8vo. $s.

Poems by Jean Ingelow.
First Series, ^vith nearly
i oo Woodcut Illustrations.

Fcp. Afto. 21 s.

The sEneid of Virgil
Translated into English
Verse.
By y. Conington, M.A.

Croivn %vo. gs.

RURAL SPORTS, HORSE and CATTLE
MANAGEMENT, &e.

Annals of the Road,
being a History of Coaching
from the Earliest Times to
the Present.

By Captain Malet. With
Practical Hints on Dri-
ving and all Coaching
matters, by Nimrod.

Reprinted from the SPORTING MAGAZINE
by permission of the Proprietors. I vol.
medium &vo. with Coloured Plates,
uniform with Mr. Birch R.eynard$ori 's
' Doivn the Road.' [On May I.

Down the Road ; or,
Reminiscences of a Gentle-
man Coachman.
By C. T. S. Birch Rey-
nardson.

Second Edition, with 12 Coloured Ilhtstra-
tions from Paintings by H. Alken.
Mediiim Svo. price 2.\s.

Elaine s Encyclopedia of
Rural Sports; Complete
Accoimts, Historical, Prac-
tical, and Descriptive, of
Himting, Shooting, Fish-
ing, Racing, &c.

With above 600 Woodcuts (20 from Designs
by JOHN LEECH). 8vo. zis.

A Book on Angling:
a Treatise on the Art of
Angling in every branch,
including full Illustrated

Lists of Salmon Flies.
By Francis Francis.

Post^vo. Portrait and Plates, 15.5-.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

IVHcockss Sea -Fisher-
man : comprising the Chief
Methods of Hook and Line
Fishing, a glance at Nets,
and remarks on Boats and
Boating.

New Edition, with 80 Woodcuts. Post &v<?.
I2s. 6d.

The Ox, his Diseases and
their Treatment ; with an
Essay on Parturition in the
Cow.

By J. R. Dobson, Memb.
R.C.V.S.

Crown &vo. with Illustrations 7s- &?•

Youatt on the Horse.
Revised and enlarged by W.
Watson, M. R.C.V.S.

8vo. Woodcuts, I2s. 6d.

Yoitatfs Work on the
Dog, revised and enlarged.

Svo. Woodcuts, 6s.

Horses and Stables.
By Colonel F. Fitzwygramy
X V. the Kings Hussars.

With 2.4f Plates of Illustrations. &vo. los.6d.

The Dog in Health and

Disease.

By Stonehenge.

With 73 Wood Engravings. Sqtiare crown
%vo. Is. 6d.

The Greyhound.
By Stonehenge.

Revised Edition, with 25 Portraits of Grey -
hounds, 6°r. Square crown Svo. 1 5 s.

Stables and Stable Fit-
tings.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Imp. $vo. with 13 Plates, \$s.

The Horses Foot, and
how to keep it Soimd.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Ninth Edition. Imp. $>vo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6rf.

A Plain Treatise on
Horse-shoeing.
By W. Miles, Esq.

Sixth Edition. Post %>vo. Woodctits, 2s. 6d.

Remarks on Horses

Teeth, addressed to Piir-

chasers.

By W. Miles, Esq.

Post Svo. is. 6d.

The Fly-Fisher s Ento-
mology.
By Alfred Ronalds.

With 20 coloured Plates. Svo. 14^.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

WORKS of UTILITY and GENERAL
INFORMATION.

Maunder s Treasury of
Knowledge and Library of
Reference ; comprising an
English Dictionary and
Grammar, Universal Ga-
zetteer, Classical Diction-
ary, Chronology, Law Dic-
tionary, Synopsis of the
Peerage, UsefidTables,&c.

Fcp. %vo. 6s.

Maunder s Biographical

Treasury.

Latest Edition, recon-
structed and partly re-
written, with about 1,000
additional Memoirs, by
W. L. R. Gates.

Fcp. Svo. 6s.

Maunder s Scientific and
Literary Treasury ; a
Popular Encyclopedia of

Science, Literature, and

Art.

New Edition, in part re-
written,with above 1,000
new articles, by J . Y.
Johnson.

Fcp. %vo. 6s.

Maunders Treasury of
Geography, Physical, His-
torical, Descriptive, and
Political.

Edited by W. Hughs,
F.R.G.S.

With 7 Maps and 16 Plates. Fcp. %vo. 6s.

Maunder s Historical

Treasury ; General Intro-
ductory Outlines of Uni-
versal History, and a
Series of Separate His-
tories.
Revised by the Rev. G. W.

Cox, M.A:

Fcp. $>vo. 6s.

Maunder s Treasttry of
N atural History ; or Popu-
lar Dictionary of Zoology.

Revised and corrected Edition. Fcp. Svo.
with 900 Woodcuts, 6s.

The Treasury of Bible
Knowledge ; being a Dic-
tionary of the Books, Per-
sons, Places, Events, and
other Matters of which
mention is made in Holy
Scripture.
By Rev. J. Ay re, M.A.

With Mafis, 1 5 Plates, and numerous Wood-
cuts. Fcp. %z'0. 6s.

The Theory and Prac~
tice of Banking.
By H. D. Macleod, M.A.

Third Edition, revised throughout. 8zro
price I2s.

The Elements of Bank-
ing.

By Henry D wining Mac-
leod, Esq. M.A.

Crown Sz'o. *]s. 6d.

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Modern Cookery for Pri-
vate Families, reduced to a
System of Easy Practice in
a Series of carefully-tested
Receipts.
By Eliza Acton.

With 8 Plates & 1 50 Woodcuts. Fcp. Svo. 6s.

A Practical Treatise on
Brewing; with Formula
for P^lblic Brewers, and
Instructions for Private
Families.
By W. Black.

Fifth Edition. Svo. icxr. 6d.

English Chess Problems.
Edited by J. Pierce, M.A.
and W. T. Pierce.

With 608 Diagrams. Croivn^vo. I2s. 6d.

The Theory of the Mo-
dern Scientific Game of
Whist.
By W. Pole, F.R.S.

Seventh Edition. Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d.

The Correct Card ; or,
How to Play at Whist : a
Whist Catechism.
By Captain A. Campbell-
Walker.

Fcp. Sv0. \N~early ready.

The Cabinet Lawyer ; a
Popular Digest of the Laws
of England, Civil, Crimi-
nal, and Constitutional.

Twenty -fourth Edition, corrected and ex-
tended. Fcp. Svo. 9-r.

Pewtners Comprehensive
Specifier ; a Guide to the
Practical Specification cf
every kind of Building-
Artificer s Work.
Edited by W. Young.

Chess Openings.

By F. W. Longman, Bal-
liol College, Oxford.

Second Edition, revised. Fcp. %vo. is. 6d.

Hints to Mothers on
the Management of their
Health during the Period
of Pregnancy and in the
Lying-in Room.
By Thomas Bull, M.D.

Fcp. 8zw. 5-r.

The Maternal Manage-
ment of Children in Health
and Disease.
By Thomas Bull, M.D.

Fcp. &vo. 5-r.

INDEX

Acton 's Modern Cookery 40

Aird's Blackstone Economised 39

A iry's Hebrew Scriptures 29

Alpine Club Map of Switzerland 34

Alpine Guide (The) 34

Amos' s Jurisprudence 10

Primer of the Constitution 10

A ndersoris Strength of Materials 20

A rmstrong's Organic Chemistry 20

Arnolds (Dr.) Christian Life 29

Lectures on Modern History 2

Miscellaneous Works 13

School Sermons 29

Sermons 29

(T. ) Manual of English Literature 12

Atherstone Priory 36

Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson ... 14

Ayres Treasury of Bible Knowledge 39

Bacon's Essays, by Whately n

Life and Letters, by Spedding ... n

Works 10

Bain's Mental and Moral Science 12

on the Senses and Intellect 12

• Emotions and Will 12

Bakers Two Works on Ceylon 34

Ball's Guide to the Central Alps 34

Guide to the Western Alps 35

Guide to the Eastern Alps 34

Bancroft's Native Races of the Pacific 23

Harry on Railway Appliances 20

Beckers Charicles and Callus 35

Black's Treatise on Brewing 40

Blackley's German- English Dictionary 16

Elaine's Rural Sports 37

Bloxam ' s Metals 20

Bouitbce on 39 Articles 29

Bourne's Catechism of the Steam Engine . 27

• Handbook of Steam Engine 27

• Treatise on the Steam Engine ... 27

Improvements in the same 27

Bowdlers Family Shakspeare 37

Bramley-Moore s Six Sisters of the Valley . 36
Brandts Dictionary of Science, Literature,

and Art 23

Brinkley's Astronomy 12

Browne's Exposition of the 39 Articles 29

Buckle's History of Civilisation 3

Posthumous Remains 12

Buckton's Health in the House 24

Bull's Hints to Mothers 4°

Maternal Management of Children . 40

Burgomaster's Family (The) 34

Burkes Rise of Great Families 8

A 6

Burkes Vicissitudes of Families 8

Busk's Folk-lore of Rome 35

Valleys of Tirol 33

Cabinet Lawyer 4°

Campbell's Norway 35

Cafes' s Biographical Dictionary 8

and Woodward's Encyclopaedia ...

Changed Aspects of Unchanged Truths ...

Chesney's Indian Polity

Modern Military Biography

Waterloo Campaign

14
3
4
3

Codringtons Life and Letters 7

Colenso on Moabite Stone &c 32

's Pentateuch and Book of Joshua. 32

Collier's Demosthenes on the Crown 13

Commonplace Philosopher in Town and

Country, by A. K. H. B 14

Comte's Positive Polity 8

Congreve s Essays 9

Politics of Aristotle n

Coningtons Translation of Virgil's ^Eneid 37

Miscellaneous Writings 13

Contanseaus Two French Dictionaries ... 15
Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles

of St. Paul 3°

Corneille's'LeCft 36

Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit... 14

Cox's (G. W.) Aryan Mythology 4

Crusades 6

History of Greece 4

General History of Greece 4

School ditto 4

Tale of the Great Persian

War 4

. Tales of Ancient Greece ... 36

Crawley's Thucydides 4

Creighton's Age of Elizabeth 6

Crests Encyclopaedia of Civil Engineering 27

Critical Essays of a Country Parson 14

Crookes's Chemical Analysis 25

Dyeing and Calico-printing 28

Culleys Handbook of Telegraphy 27

Davidson's Introduction to the New Tes-
tament 31

D'Aubigne's Reformation 31

De Caisne and Le Maont's Botany 24

De Morgan's Paradoxes 13

De Tocquevillc's Democracy in America... 9

Disraeli's Lord George Bentinck 8

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Disraeli's Novels and Tales 35

Dobson on the Ox 38

Doves Law of Storms 18

Doyle's (R.) Fairyland 25

Eastlakes Hints on Household Taste 26

Edwards 's Rambles among the Dolomites 34

Nile 32

Elements of Botany 23

Ellicotts Commentary on Ephesians 30

• Galatians
•Pastoral Epist.

• Philippians,&c.

• Thessalonians .

30
30
30
30

Lectures on Life of Christ 29

Elsa : a Tale of the Tyrolean Alps 36

Evans (J.) Ancient Stone Implements ... 23

(A. J.) Bosnia 33

Eiualds History of Israel 30

Antiquities of Israel 31

Fairl aim's Application of Cast and

Wrought Iron to Building... 27

Information for Engineers 27

Life 7

Treatise on Mills and Millwork 27

Farrars Chapters on Language 13

Families of Speech 13

Fitzwygram on Horses and Stables 38

Forbes's Two Years in Fiji 33

Francis's Fishing Book 37

Freeman's Historical Geography of Europe 6

Fres/ifield's Italian Alps 33

Froudes English in Ireland 2

History of England 2

Short Studies 12

Gairdners Houses of Lancaster and York 6

Ganot's Elementary Physics 20

* Natural Philosophy 19

Gardiner s Buckingham and Charles 3

Thirty Years' War 6

Geffckeris Church and State 10

German Home Life 13

Gibson s Religion and Science 29

Gilbert & Churchill's Dolomites 34

Girdlestone' s Bible Synonyms 29

Goodcve' s Mechanics 20

Mechanism 20

Grant's Ethics of Aristotle n

Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson 14

Greville' s Journal 2

Griffin's Algebra and Trigonometry 20

Grohman's Tyrol and the Tyrolese 32

Grove (Sir W. R. ) on Correlation of Phy-
sical Forces 19

• (F. C.) The Frosty Caucasus 32

Givilt's Encyclopaedia of Architecture 26

Harrison's Order and Progress 9

Hartley on the Air 19

hart-wig s Aerial World 22

Polar World 22

Hartwig's Sea and its Living Wonders ... 22

Subterranean World 22

Tropical World 22

Haughtoris Animal Mechanics 20

Hay-ward's Biographical and Critical Essays 7

Heathcote 's Fen and Mere 28

Heine' s Life and Works, by Stigand 7

Helmholtz on Tone 23

Helmhollzs Scientific Lectures 19

Helms ley's Trees, Shrubs, and Herbaceous

Plants 24

Herschfl's Outlines of Astronomy 18

Hiu.chliff's Over the Sea and Far Away ... 33

Holland's Fragmentary Papers 21

Holms on the Army 4

HullaKs History of Modern Music 23

Transition Period 23

Humes~E.ssa.ys 12

Treatise on Human Nature... 12

Ihnes History of Rome 5

Indian Alps 32

Ingelow s Poems 37

Jamesons Legends of Saints and Martyrs . 26

Legends of the Madonna 26

Legends of the Monastic Orders 26

Legends of the Saviour 26

*e1f on Confession 30

in's Electricity and Magnetism 20

ferratn's Lycidas of Milton 35

~~ferrold's Life of Napoleon 2

Johnston's Geographical Dictionary 17

*ukes's Types of Genesis 31

— on Second Death .. QI

Kalisch's Commentary on the Bible 30

Keith's Evidence of Prophecy 30

Kerfs Metallurgy, by Crookcs and Rohrig. 27

Kingsleys American Lectures 13

Kirby and Spences Entomology 21

Kirkman's Philosophy ir

Knatchbull - Hugcsseri s Whispers from

Fairy-Land ... 35
Higgledy-Piggledy 35

Lamar fine's Toussaint Louverture 36

Landscapes, Churches, &c. by A. K. H. B. 14

Lang's Ballads and Lyrics 36

Latham's English Dictionary 15

Handbook of the English Lan-
guage 15

Laughton's Nautical Surveying 19

Lawrence on Rocks 22

Lecky's History of European Morals 5

Rationalism 5

Leaders of Public Opinion 8

Lee's Kesslerloch 22

Lefroy s Bermudas 33

Leisure Hours in Town, by A. K. H. B.... 14

Lessons of Middle Age, by A. K. H. B.... 14

Lewes' s Biographical History of Philosophy 6

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

Leu'is on Authority 12

Liddellandi Scott's Greek-English Lexicons 16

Lindlcy and Moore s Treasury of Botany... 23

Lloyd 's Magnetism 21

Wave-Theory of Light 21

Lena-man's (F. W.) Chess Openings 40

German Dictionary ... 15

(W.) Edward the Third 2

Lectures on History of

England 2

Old and New St. Paul's 26

London's Encyclopaedia of Agriculture ... 28

Gardening 28

Plants 24

Lubbock 's Origin of Civilisation 22

Lyra Germanica 32

Macaulays (Lord) Essays '. i

History of England «> i

Lays of Ancient Rome 25, 36

Life and Letters 7

Miscellaneous Writings 12

Speeches 12

Works 2

McCulloch's Dictionary of Commerce 16

Alacleod's Principles of Economical Philo-
sophy 10

Theory and Practice of Banking 39

Elements of Banking 39

Mademoiselle Mori 36

~Malct's Annals of the Road 37

Mallesoii s Genoese Studies 3

Native States of India 3

Marshall's Physiology 25

Marshmari s History of India 3

Life of Havelock 8

Martineau's Christian Life 32

Hymns 31

Maunder s Biographical Treasury 39

Geographical Treasury 39

Historical Treasury 39

Scientific and Literary Treasury 39

Treasury of Knowledge 39

Treasury of Natural History ... 39

Maxweir s Theory of Heat 20

May's History of Democracy 2

History of England 2

Melville's Digby Grand 36

General Bounce 36

Gladiators 36

Good for Nothing 36

Holmby House 36

Interpreter 36

Kate Coventry 36

Queens Maries 36

Poorest Trees and Woodland

Menzies1

Scenery

Merivale's Fall of the Roman Republic

General History of Rome ..

Romans under the Empire

Merrifidd 's Arithmetic and Mensuration...
Miles on Horse's Foot and Horse Shoeing

on Horse's Teeth and Stables 38

Mill (].) on the Mind 10

(J. S.) on Liberty 9

on Representative Government 9

Utilitarianism 9

Autobiography 7

Milts Dissertations and Discussions

Essays on Religion £c 2

Hamilton's Philosophy

System of Logic

Political Economy

Unsettled Questions

Miller's Elements of Chemistry 2

• Inorganic Chemistry 2

M info's (Lord) Life and Letters

Mitchell's Manual of Assaying 2

Modern Novelist's Library 3

Monsell's ' Spiritual Songs ' 3

Moore's Irish Melodies, illustrated 2

Morant's Game Preservers 2

More II' s Elements of Psychology i

• Mental Philosophy i

Mailer's Chips from a German Workshop, i

Science of Language i

Science of Religion

Ncison on the Moon i!

New Reformation, by Theodoras

New Testament, Illustrated Edition 2

Northcott's Lathes and Turning 2'

O' Conor s Commentary on Hebrews 3:

Romans 3:

— St. John 3:

Owen's Comparative Anatomy and Physio-
logy of Vertebrate Animals 2:

Packe's Guide to the Pyrenees

Pagct's Naval Powers

Pattison's Casaubon

Pay en's Industrial Chemistry

Pewtner's Comprehensive Specifier

Piercc's Chess Problems

Plunkefs Travels in the Alps

Pole's Game of Whist

Preece & Sivewright's Telegraphy

Prenderga st' s Mastery of Languages

Present-Day Thoughts, by A. K. H. B. ...

Proctor s Astronomical Essays

• Moon

Orbs around Us

Other Worlds than Ours

Saturn

Scientific Essays (New Series) ...

• Sun

Transits of Venus

Two Star Atlases

Universe

Public Schools Atlas of Ancient Geography

Atlas of Modern Geography

Manual of Modern Geo-
graphy

Raiolinsoris Parthia.

Sassanians

Recreations of a Country Parson 14

Redgrave's Dictionary of Artists 25

Reilly's Map of Mont Blanc 34.

• Monte Rosa 34

Reresbys Memoirs

NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS & CO.

.Reynardson' s Down the Road 37

Jtich's Dictionary of Antiquities 15

Jtiver's Roje Amateur's Guide 23

.Rogers' s Eclipse of Faith 30

Defence of Eclipse of Faith 30

Essays. 9

Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and

Phrases 15

Ronald's. Fly- Fisher's Entomology 38

JZoscoes Outlines of Civil Procedure 10

Jtothschild s Israelites 30

Russell's Recollections and Suggestions ... 2

Sandars's Justinian's Institutes 10

.Savile on Apparitions 13

on Primitive Faith 30

Schellen's Spectrum Analysis 19

•Scott's Lectures on the Fine Arts 25

Poems 25

Papers on Civil Engineering 28

Seaside Musing, by A. K. H. B 14

Seebohin's Oxford Reformers of 1498 4

Protestant Revolution 6

Scwelfs Questions of the Day 31

Preparation for Communion 31

Stories and Tales 36

Thoughts for the Age 31

History of France 3

Shelley's Workshop Appliances 20

Short's Church History 6

Simpson's Meeting the Sun 34

Smith's (Sydney) Essays 12

Wit and Wisdom 13

(Dr. R. A.) Air and Rain 19

JSouthey's Doctor 13

Poetical Works 37

Stanley's History of British Birds 22

.Stephen's Ecclesiastical Biography 8

Stockmars Memoirs 7

Stonehenge on the Dog 38

on the Greyhound 38

Sto/tey on Strains 28

Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church of

a University City, by A. K. H. B 14

Supernatural Religion 32

£winbourne's Picture Logic n

Taylors History of India 3

Manual of Ancient History 6

Manual of Modern History 6

(Jeremy) Works, edited by Eden. 31

Text-Books of Science 20

Thomsons Laws of Thought n

Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis 20

Thorpe and Muir's Qualitative Analysis ... 20

Todd (A.) on Parliamentary Government... 2

Trench's Realities of Irish Life 13

Trollope's Barchester Towers 36

Warden 36

Twiss's Law of Nations 10

Tyndall ' s American Lectures on Light ... 20

Diamagnetism 20

Fragments of Science 20

Lectures on Electricity 21

Lectures on Light 21

Lectures on Sound 20

Heat a Mode of Motion 20

. — Molecular Physics 20

Ueberweg's System of Logic n

Ure's Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures,

and Mines 27

Voltaire's Zaire 36

Walker on Whist 40

Warburtoris Edward the Third 6

Watsons Geometry 20

Watts' s Dictionary of Chemistry 25

Webb's Objects for Common Telescopes ... 18

Weinhold's Experimental Physics 19

Wellington's Life, by Gleig 8

Whately's English Synonymes 15

Logic ii

Rhetoric n

White and Riddle's Latin Dictionaries ... 16

Wilcocks's Sea-Fisherman 38

Williams' s Aristotle's Ethics n

Wood's (T. G.) Bible Animals 22

Homes without Hands ... 21

Insects at Home 21

• Insects Abroad 21

Out of Doors 22

Strange Dwellings 21

( J. T. ) Ephesus 33

Wyatt's History of Prussia 3

Yongcs English-Greek Lexicons 16

Horace 37

Youatt on the Dog ..
on the Horse

Zellers Plato 6

Socrates =

Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics... =

Zimmerris Life of Schopenhauer 7

LONDON : PRINTED BY
cpOTTISU'OODE AND CO., NE\V-STREET SQUARE

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Petri privilegium : three pastoral letters to the clergy of the diocese"

See other formats